Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arciiive 

in  2007  witii  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcli  ive.org/details/debateonromancatOOcampiala 


UUSB  LIBRARY 

A    DEBATE 

OM   TJU 

aOMAN  CATHOLIC  RELIGION 


HKjD    in    the    SYCAMORK-STREET    meeting    bouse,    CINCINNATI, 
FROM    THE     13th    TO   THE    21st   UF    JANUARY,  1837. 


ALEXANDER    CAMPBELL, 

OF    BETHANY,    VIRGINIA, 
AND   THE 

RT.    REV.    JOHN    B.    PURGELL, 

BISHOP     OF     CINCINNATI. 

I 
TAKEN  DOWN  BY  REPORTERS.  ANI>  REVISED  BY  THF,  PARTIBa 


NEW  YORK  AND  CINCINNATI:   ^ 
BENZIG^ER    BROTHERS, 

PriNTERS  TO  THE  HOLY  APOSTOLIC  SEE. 


We  thfl  «ndersig;ned,  having  sold  and  conveyed  to  J.  A.  James  and  Co.,  ol 
Cincinnati  for  a  certain  sum  per'copy,  (to  be  paid  by  them  to  us,  or  to  our  or 
der,  and  to  be  appropriated  to  two  public  charitable  institutions,  as  agreed  on 
between  ourselves,1  for  all  that  shall  be  printed ;  the  exclusive  right  of  printing 
and  publishing  the  t)EB ATE  on  the  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  RELIGION,  held  in 
th*  Sycamore  Street  Meeting  House,  Cincinnati,  from  the  13th  to  the  2l8t.  of 
January  1837,  inclusive,  between  ourselves,  and  taken  down  by  Reporters,  em- 
ployed by  the  said  J.  A.  James  &  Co.,  and  revised,  corrected,  and  approved  by 
us,  do  hfreby  make  known  that  the  edition  or  editions  published  by  J.  A.  Janxe* 
&  Co.,  or  by  their  authority,  and  revised  by  us,  must  be  considered  the  only  cor- 
rec(  and  authorized  editions  of  taid  DEBATE. 

CmciNNATi,  Feb.  Irt.  1837.  +  JOHN  B.  PURCELL, 

Bp.  Cin. 
A.  CAMPBELL. 


N 


PREFACE. 


It  has  been  judged  expedient  to  insert,  by  "way  of  preface 
to  tlie  following  Controversy,  the  subjoined  notice,  from  a  pa- 
per published  in  Cincinnati,  by  Protestant  proprietors,  of  the 
circumstances  under  which  the  debate  originated.  We  regret 
that  it  is  not  in  our  power,  at  the  same  time,  to  present  to  the 
public  the  remarks  of  Bishop  Purcell,  in  the  College  of  Teach- 
ers, to  which  exception  was  so  wantonly  taken  by  Mr.  Camp- 
bell. But  we  have  not  now  before  us  a  file  of  the  Cincinnati 
Catholic  Telegraphy  in  which  they  originally  appeared,  or  of 
the  Cincinnati  Gazette^  into  which  they  were  subsequently 
copied.  The  annexed  account,  however,  which  is  from  the 
Cincinnati  Gazette  of  the  Yth  of  February,  1836,  will,  it  is 
thought,  be  sufficient  to  satisfy  the  curiosity  of  readers  gene- 
rally. They  who  desire  more  ample  infoi*mation  on  the  sub- 
ject will  consult  the  periodicals  named,  or  the  "  Transactions 
of  tlie  College  of  Teachers"  for  the  year  1836,  in  which  the 
discourses  of  Bishop  Purcell,  Dr.  Joshua  Wilson,  and  Mr. 
Campbell  have  been  published. 

"  Some  few  yeai-s  ago,  a  manufactory  of  public  opinion  wa8 
got  up  '  doion  ^Eist,''  the  object  of  which  was  to  put  Catholics 
back  to  their  old  position.  This  manufactory  manufactured  a 
mol)  to  burn  a  Convent,  and  the  coinage  of  various  books, 
which  a  man  could  not  read  in  the  presence  of  his  daughters. 
Our  city  of  Cincinnati  is  fast  becoming  a  manufacturing  city  ; 
consequently  this  Eastern  manufactory  notion  respecting  Ca- 
tholics began  to  gain  foothold,  and  was  making  lieadway 
amongst  us.  In  this  state  of  things,  an  occasion  was  soon 
found  for  going  to  work. 

"  There  is  one  Alexander  Campbell,  of  considerable  notori- 
ety in  this  country,  of  no  mean  capacity — learned,  self-confi- 
dent, and  indefatigable.  This  gentleman,  as  we  have  under 
his  own  hand,  in  Saturday's  Gazette,  took  upon  himself  many 
yeai'3  ago,  '■to  unite  all  Protestant  Christians  as  one  great  bond 
of  union^  as  Catholic,  as  Protestantism.''  Such  an  undertaking 
is  abundant  proof  of  the  undertaker's  self-confidence.  It  is 
well  known  that  Mr.  Campbell  labored  in  this  great  work  with 


iv  PREFACE. 

assiduity.  He  was  liiraself  the  operative  mannfactnrer,  lie 
knew  his  tools,  kept  them  in  excellent  order  and  in  constant 
use — hut  he  produced  no  such  '  luiion  '  as  he  was  seeking  to 
manufacture.  On  the  contraiy,  his  eftbrts  xery  soon  manufac- 
tured disunion  in  tlie  Baptist  church,  of  which  he  was  a  meiij- 
ber.  And  then,  again,  his  next  manufacture  was  an  addition- 
al Protestant  sect,  of  which  he  was  the  founder  and  head. 
Like  all  ardent  projectors,  he  was  nothing  discouraged.  His 
fancy  that  he  was  to  become  the  great  '  Millennial  Harbin- 
ger,'for  effecting  his  contemplated  Protestant  *  ,7?Y/«f?  bond 
qfiiuio?),^  remained  apparently  as  vivid  and  as  sanguine  as  it 
was  when  he  commenced  his  work.  But  dissatisfaction  arose 
in  the  minds  of  others.  His  works  were  judged  by  their 
fruits,  and  these  were  esteemed  hitter  ;  sowing  discords  among 
Protestant  churches,  instead  of  producing  the  htaUngs  of 
union.  Most  Protestants  of  distinction  and  circumspection 
avoided  continuing  to  give  him  consequence,  hy  engaging  in 
controversy  with  him  ;  but  he  found  a  resource,  for  the  mo- 
ment, in  the  famous  Owen,  of  Lanark,  with  whom  he  got  a 
tilting  match  here,  in  Cincinnati,  the  fame  of  which  did  not 
endure  long.  For  some  time  i>ast,  he  has  been  rather  out  of 
the  world,  and  had  even  been  criss-crossed  by  the  two  *  Jour- 
nals '  of  Cincinnati.  Still,  however,  he  retahied  amongst  us  a 
number  of  ardent,  respectable  supportei-s,  so  that  a  visit  to 
Cincinnati  was  quite  a  matter  of  coui'se. 

"  Opportunely,  the  College  of  Teachers  met  in  October  last, 
of  which  the  Catholic  Bishop  was  a  member,  and  Mr.  Camp- 
bell also.  Here,  with  his  usual  tact,  he  manufactured  an  oc- 
casion for  exhibiting  once  more  his  manufacturing  poAvers. 
Mr.  Campbell  advanced  certain  positions  and  employed  certain 
arguments  that  were  used  to  furnish  materials  for  commencing 
a  manufacturing  of  public  opinion,  hereabouts  ;  not  on  the 
^t(nio7i  of  aU  Protestant  Christians,'' hnt  on  the  errors  and 
mischief  of  '  Romanism  ! '  The  most  approved  method  of  the 
day  Avas  resorted  to.  Some  sixty  citizens  unite  together  to 
put  the  Avork  m  motion.  Mr.  Campbell  is  requested  to  enforce 
and  enlarge,  in  a  public  discussion,  his  '  exposure  and  illustra- 
tions of  tJie  absurd  claims  and  usages  of  the  Moman  Catholic 
Church^  as  announced  in  six  propositions  in  a  })ublic  meeting. 
Mr.  Cam])bell  accedes,  in  due  form,  and  Avrites  a  news})aper 
column,  discussing  the  conduct  ot  Bishop  Purcell,  in  this  mat- 
ter, and  discussing  himself  and  his  own  doings,  and  then  en- 
larging on  Avhat  he  intended  to  do.  His  letter  also  set  forth 
nine  specifications,  of  Avhat  he  meant  to  take  in  hand,  and  in 
respect  to  Avhich,  of  course,  he  proposed  to  manufacture  a  pub- 
lic opinion. 

"  This  correspondence  Avas  brought  to  the  Gazette  office  for 
publication.     I  thought  I  perceived  its  drift  and  consequences. 


PREFACE.  V 

Mr.  Campbell  avouIcI  be  got  before  the  public  as  the  champion 
of  Protestantism.  He  expected  to  obtain  reputation  as  '  de- 
fender of  the  faith,''  upon  which  to  carry  on  his  further  opera- 
tions. Its  ett'ects,  here,  would  be  to  exasperate  existing  pre- 
judices— to  supply  ALiMEN'T  for  new  antipathies  and  excite- 
ments, to  provoke  intlividual  controversies,  and  thus  disturb 
the  harmony  of  the  community,  with  no  possibiliiy  of  benefit 
to  anybody  but  Mr.  Campbell  himself.  The  publication  of  the 
correspondence  was  objected  to  by  me,  on  these  grounds. 
And,  in  addition,  on  the  ground  that  the  nine  propositions  to 
be  discussed  were  couched  in  terms  unnecessarily  and  offen- 
sively opprobrious." 

In  the  same  paper,  of  the  loth  of  December  previous,  the 
following  letter  of  J>ishop  Purcell  appeared  in  answer  to  a 
challenge  from  Mr.  Campbell  to  a  i»ublic  discussion : 

"  Mr.  Editor  :  In  a  communication  over  the  signature  of  A. 
Campbell,  in  Friday  morning's  Gazette,  that  gentleman  is 
made  to  say,  '  We  hope  that  our  Roman  Catholic  friends,  who 
have  avowed  their  regard  for  free  discussion,  and  who  have 
so  boldly  and  wantonly  impugned  Protestant  principles,  will 
(then  and  there)  be  in  readiness  to  sustain  their  allegata,  or  to 
dispute  the  pi'opositions  we  have  submitted  to  their  considera- 
tion.' 

"Now,  as  Mr.  Campbell  modestly  declines  the  epithet  Re- 
verend in  connection  with  his  name,  and  yet  inconsistently  as- 
sumes the  proud  title  of  AVK,  I  ])resume,  from  recent  circum- 
stances to  which  he  alludes,  that  I  may  consider  myself,  with- 
out any  suspicion  of  vanity,  to  be  thcMiumble  individual  whom 
he  honors  with  a  pluraUzatto?i  in  the  word  '  friends.'  So  far, 
then,  if  I  may  begin  this  very  grave  business  with  a  laugh,  we 
are  both  eve/i,  though  each  of  us  is  an  odd  number  ! 

"  But,  sir,  I  deny  that  I  have  'boldly  and  wantonly  im- 
pugned Protestant  principles.'  It  is  all  t other  way,  Mr.  Edi- 
tor, and  as  I  desire  that  the  public  should  be  rightly  informed 
on  this  subject,  I  proceed  at  once  to  the  proof. 

"  Some  time  past,  as  long  ago  as  last  February,  be  it  noted, 
I  received  through  the  Post  Office  a  copy  of  the  February 
number  of  the  '  Christian  Preacher,'  edited  by  D.  S.  Burnet, 
Cincinnati.  On  the  Avr.apper  were  conspicuously  pencilled  the 
words,  '  See  page  48.'  I  lost  no  time  in  making  the  reference, 
and  on  the  page  indicated  read  as  follows :  '  Who  will  try  ?' 
Mr.  Alexander  Campbell,  in  Plarbinger,  Vol.  VII.,  No.  .3,  de- 
clares his  willingness  to  meet  any  respectable  friend  of  the 
Pope,  who  will  engage  to  defend  the  claims  of  '  his  holiness,' 
with  either  the  ])en  or  the  tongue. 

"  Not  choosing  to  disturb  the  j»cace  of  the  religious  commu- 


VI  PBEPACE. 

iiity,  by  stirring  up  the  bitter  waters  of  controversy,  I  took  no 
further  notice  of  this  '  bold  and  wanton  '  challenge. 

"  In  the  April  number  of  the  same  periodical,  I  was  again 
and  similarly  referred  to  another  '  bold  and  wanton'  challenge 
from  Mr.  A.  Campbell,  which,  as  a  fair  specimen  of  the  au- 
thor's sense  and  ministerial  courtesy,  I  shall  submit  to  the  can- 
did judgment  of  my  fellow-citizens,  I  am  confident  that  every 
unprejudiced  reader  will  conclude,  after  its  perusal,  that  Mr. 
Cami)l)ell  is  himself  the  '  bold  and  wanton  '  aggressor,  which 
he  has  most  disingenuously,  and  without  one  particle  of  Chris- 
tian truth  or  fairness,  labored  to  make  me  appear  before  the 
people  of  Cincinnati — amongst  whom,  I  trust,  I  have  not  one 
enemy.  If  I  have,  unconsciously,  such  a  misfortune,  I  am  sure 
I  have  not  deserved  it. 


'  MR.  CAMPBELL  AND  THE  PAPISTS. 

'  "We  have  just  room  enough  to  insert  the  extract  from  the 
March  Harbinger  below.  It  is  about  the  last  half  of  Mr.  C.'s 
reply  to  the  communication  of  "  W.  A.,"  a  Romanist  of  Spring- 
field, 111.  We  ask  again,  wlio  will  try  to  sustain  the  claims  of 
the  Pope  and  Popery  T — Editor  of  the  Preacher. 

'  But  as  the  gentleman  has  not  attempted  (and  as  it  is  pre- 
sumed no  man  will  fairly  attempt)  to  show  either  scriptural  or 
logical  discrepancy  in  my  essav  alluded  to,  I  will  not  again  re- 
peat what  I  have  written  on  tfie  conversation  at  Ca^sarea  Phi- 
lippi.  That  view  of  the  passage  I  stand  ready  to  sustain 
against  the  Pope  himself,  or  any  Bishop  imder  his  jurisdic- 
tion, in  the  old  world  or  new.  They  shall  have  as  much  anti- 
quity as  they  please,  and  as  many  of  the  traditions  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Fathers  as  they  can  hang  upon  any  two  of  the  longest 
pins  in  St.  Peter's  Church — provided  only  these  traditions  do 
not  fairly  and  flatly  contradict  each  other,  and  both  Peter  and 
Paul  into  the  bargain.  It  is  higli  time  that  the  American  peo- 
ple should  be  enlightened  upon  this  subject,  and  every  drop  of 
oil  in  my  lamp  is  at  their  service  whenever  a  trustworthy  son  of 
the  modern  St.  Peter  appears  ready  for  the  discussion. 

'  If  I  can  prove  to  any  Jew  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the 
true  Messiah — if  I  can  prove  to  any  sceptic,  Greek  or  Roman, 
French  or  English  philosopher,  that  he  is  the  Sou  of  God,  and 
the  only  Saviour  of  the  world,  and  the  author  of  eternal  sal- 
vation to  all  who  obey  him — then  can  I  prove  to  any  impartial 
jury  that  the  Pope  of  Rome  is  "  the  yuan  of  siti'''  foretold  by 
Paul,  and  "  the  son  of  perdition,"  whose  ruin  is  predicted  by 
St.  John. 

'  But  I  must  have  a  man^  a  full-grown  man,  with  whom  to 
discuss  the  proposition  submitted,  aud  one  hi  whose  judgment 


PREFACE.  VU 

tlic  Romanists  themselves,  inferior  clergy  and  people,  have 
confidence.  I  Avill  contend  with  him  by  one  of  two  weapons 
— he  may  choose — the  tongue  or  the  ^je>/.' 

"  With  respect  to  Mr.  Campbell's  cartel,  I  nave  only  to  say, 
that,  however  low  of  stature,  my  trust  is  strong  in  God  and  in 
the  might  of  His  truth,  that,  when  the  hour  of  trial  comes,  I 
shall  he  found  more  than  a  match  for  this  vaunting  Goliah.    - 

"JOHN  B.  PURCELL, 

"  Hishop  of  CiiicinnatV 


THE    CONTRO^rERSY. 

The  discussion  between  the  Rt.  Rev.  Bishop  Purcell  and 
Mr.  xllexander  Campbell  terminated  on  Saturday  at  noon, 
after  eight  days'  continuance.  The  intei'est  which  it  awakened 
in  the  public  mind  continued  unabated  to  the  last  moment,  and 
tlie  audience  was  so  large  that  fears  were  frequently  expressed 
respecting  the  solidity  of  the  edifice.  We  repeat  what  we  said 
last  week,  that  a  more  propitious  event  for  Catholics  could  not 
have  occui-red.  We  will  not  give  expression  to  what  we  feel, 
nor  will  we  exhibit  any  uxidtatiou  regarding  the  result,  for 
fear  that  our  testimony  may  be  considered  interested  ;  but  our 
readers  Avill  find  below  the  evidence  of  the  daily  press  of  this 
city,  and  we  cheerfully  refer  them  to  their  unbiased  declara- 
tions. 

(From  the  Baily  Oazette.) 

«A  BOTTLE   OF   TEARS. 

"  The  fact  that  Mr.  Campbell  opened  the  grand  debate  here, 
by  a  notice  of  the  Gazette,  has  already  been  mentioned.  That 
notice  is  thus  written  out  in  the  reports  of  the  Cross  and 
Jiaptist  Journal : 

'  I  have  come  hero  to-day  in  defence  of  the  principles  of 
Protestantism — not  as  the  partisan  of  a  sect.  Much  pains 
have  been  taken  to  produce  the  impression  that  I  am  the  as- 
sailant. The  Gazette  of  this  city  has  called  this  discussion  "  a 
war  on  the  Catholicsy  It  is  worthy  of  note  that  wlienever 
Catholicism  is  likely  to  suffer,  the  conductor  of  the  Gazette  has 
a  bottle  of  tears  to  shed.  Whether  these  tears  are  religious  or 
political,  I  cannot  tell.' 

'''Whenever  Catholicism  is  LIKELY  TO  SUFFER,  the  con- 
ductor of  the  Gazette  has  a  bottle  of  tears  to  shed.''     '  Likely 


Viil  PREPACK. 

TO  Suffer  !'  There  is  moflesty  for  you  !  Mr.  Campbell  is 
about  to  make  Catholicism  '  SUFFER  ;'  whereupon,  in  terror 
and  apprehension,  as  Mr.  Campbell  seems  to  have  imagined,  of 
his  mi<5hty  Bri;in  ]>e  Bois  Gilbert  exploits,  the  conductor  of 
the  Gazette  uncorked  a  bottle  of  tears,  and  poured  forth  his 
griefs  in  anticipation.  Alas  !  for  Mr.  Campbell's  vainglory  ! 
None  who  bottled  up  tears  for  that  occasion  found  any  reason 
to  uncork  their  bottles.  Catholicism  was  little  put  to  the  tor- 
ture. She  could  not  truly  say,  '  my  sufferings  IS  hitolerahle."* 
Mr.  Campbell's  '■defence  of  Prot'Stantism''  has  turned  out  to 
be  a  very  considerable  failure,  so  far  as  rendering  Catholicism 
odious  was  a  part  of  his  effort.  Most  of  those  who  heard  the 
debate,  with  the  least  ])reju(licc,  think  better  of  Catholics  than 
they  bad  previously  thought.  If  any  have  unbottled  their 
store  of  tears,  I  suspect  it  is  some  of  those  who  called  Mr. 
Campbell  to  this  discussion." 


(From  tlie  samel) 

"THE  GRAND  DEBATE. 

"This  ^ grand  affair''  closed  on  Saturday.  Of  the  result, 
there  seems  to  be  but  one  general  opinion — Mr.  Campbell  Jid 
Catholicism  no  injury.  His  effort  was  a  grand  failure.  Alas 
for  Protestantism  !  if  she  stood  upon  Mr.  Campbell's  shield 
and  buckler.  Both  the  combatants  talked  in  the  dead  lan- 
guages. I  claim  to  be  equally  pedantic.^  A»id  of  Mr,  Camp- 
bell's defence  of  Protestantism,  I  say  : 

^Jffon  tali  auxilio,  nee  defensoribu»  isfis, 
Tempus  eget.'' 

"  No,  indeed  !  Mr.  Campbell  has  made  it  manifest  that  he 
is  not  the  man  required  by  the  times  to  make  Catholicism 
*  suffer.^  The  suffering,  if  any,  is  on  the  part  of  himseJf  and 
of  his  employers.     '  We  leave  them  alone  in  their  glory?  " 


(From  the  ^Yllig.') 

"THE  DEBATE. 

"The  debate  (on  the  subject  of  the  correctness  of  the  Ro 
man  Catholic  Doctrine)  between  Mr.  Alexaiuler  Campbell  and 
Bishop  Purcell,  ends  to-day.  We  understand  that,  thus  far, 
it  has  created  a  vast  deal  of  interest,  and  that  large  audiences 
of  both  sexes  have  been  daily  in  attendance.    We  regret  very 


much  that  we  have  "been  prevented  by  indisposition  from 
hearing  any  portion  of  it.  We  have,  however,  heard  many 
speak  of  it  (none  of  whom  hav.e  been  Catholics),  and  the  opin- 
ion seems  to  be  universal  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  been  '  pretty 
well  used  up.'*  And  not  only  so,  but  so  successful  have  been 
the  Bishop's  efforts,  that  he  has  not  only  completely  succeeded 
in  wii»ing  away  the  prejudices  against  Catholicism,  but  has 
well  nigh  converted  to  his  faith  a  large  portion  of  his  Protes- 
tant auditors.  We  have  not  heard  a  dissenting  voice  to  the 
opinion  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  utterly  failed  in  establishing  a 
single  one  of  the  original  objections  to  the  Catholic  Doctrine 
which  he  set  out  to  prove. 

"  As  we  have  no  tincture  of  Catholicism  in  our  composition, 
the  foregoing  remarks  cannot  bo  supposed  to  have  emanated 
from  any  bias  or  partiality  towards  it.  We  speak  the  senti- 
ments of  others  who  have  attended  the  debate,  many  of  whom 
went  there,  in  the  first  instance,  with  violent  prejudices  against 
the  Catholics  and  their  doctrine." 


(From  the  Eepublican.) 
"THE  CONTROVERSY. 

"  We  have  been  repeatedly  asked,  why  we  have  not  noticed 
the  '  grand  debate,'  as  our  neighbor  of  the  Gazette  calls  it,  be- 
tween Mr.  Campbell,  the  great  exterminator  of  Catholicism, 
and  every  other  ism  but  his  own  selfistn,  and  Bishop  Purcell, 
which  for  a  week  p.ast  has  engrossed  the  attention  of  our  citi- 
zens, to  the  exclusion  almost  of  every  other  subject.  We  could 
assign  many  excellent  reasons  why  we  have  not  followed  the 
example  of  the  editor  of  the  Gazette,  and  reported  the  pro- 
gress, from  day  to  day,  of  this  unprofitable  controversy.  The 
best  reason,  however,  which  we  could  possibly  advance  is  that 
furnished  by  the  Gazette,  viz. :  That  there  was  nothing  to  re- 
port— that  seven  days  have  been  consumed  in  argument,  and 
that  not  a  single  point  has  yet  been  established.  And  that  the 
modern  Don  Quixote,  who  set  out  with  a  flourish  of  trumpets, 
with  the  vain  boast  of  being  able  to  demolish  the  Catholic  re- 
ligion, has  failed  to  accomplish  his  threat,  and  retires  from  the 
contest  pretty  much  afier  the  manner  of  the  sorry  knight  of 
La  ]Mancha,  from  his  assault  iipon  the  windmill — crippled  and 
discomfited.  We  have  no  sectarian  prejudices  :  we  have  been 
brought  up  in  reverence  of  the  principles  of  Chi-istianity  as  in- 
culcated by  the  Bible,  Avithout  regard  to  any  particular  rite  or 
form  of  worship.  We  have  been  taught  to  believe  that  cha- 
rity and  faith  constitute  the  foundation  or  keystone  to  true 


X  PilliFACE. 

Christianity  ;  and  that,  without  them,  there  can  he  no  genuine 
religion.  We  have  been  taught  to  hold  in  utter  contempt  all 
narrow-mindedness  and  bigotry  among  professors  of  Christia- 
nity as  at  variance  with  the  liberal  doctrines  of  our  Saviour, 
who  enjoined  upon  his  followers  to  '  do  unto  othei*s  as  they 
would  wish  to  be  done  by,'  and  proclaimed  '  good-will  to  all 
men.'  And  we  have  ever  looked  upon  religious  persecution 
as  the  most  odious  of  all  pei-secutions,  no  matter  from  what 
source  it  emanates,  or  against  what  sect  it  is  brought  to  bear. 
It  may  be  presumed,  therefore,  that  we  have  no  approbation 
to  bestow  upon  the  illiberal  policy  of  those  who,  like  Mi-. 
Campbell,  have  entered  upon  a  crusade  against  the  Catholic 
religion  to  gratify  their  malice  or  a  vain  desire  for  distiuction  ; 
or  commiseration  to  award,  if,  in  their  attempts  to  demolish 
the  Catholics,  they  get  demolished  themselves." 


(From  the  Cindnnati  DaUy  Gazette.) 
"THE    GRAND    DEBATK 

"Tliis  exciting  commotion  was  concluded  on  Saturday,  Ja- 
nuary 21st,  after  an  eight-day  discussion,  of  about  four  hours 
each  day.  The  int-erest  and  the  audience  continued  to  increase 
until  it  became  the  chief  topic  of  conversation  in  the  city. 
The  better  opinion  is,  that  Protestantism  gained  nothing  in 
the  contest,  and  that  Catholicism  sifffered  nothing.  Mr.  Camp- 
hell's  notion  expressed,  at  the  commencement,  that  an  appre- 
hension of  approaching  inflictions  upon  the  Catholics  had 
caused  the  shedding  of  some  bottled  tears,  turned  out  to  he  a 
conception  of  his  own  self  confidence,  which  he  failed  to  real- 
ize. A  new  feeling  favorable  to  Catholicism  has  been  created 
in  the  minds  of  many  by  the  discussion.  It  may  be  thus  ex- 
plained : 

"  For  some  two  or  three  years,  incessant  eflTorts  have  been 
made  to  cast  odium  upon  the  Catholics,  especially  upon  their 
clergy.  This  has  been  particularly  the  casein  Boston,  in  New- 
York,  and  Cincinnati.  An  inundation  of  books,  various  and 
successive,  have  been  poured  upon  the  country,  calculated  to 
make  an  impression  that  the  Catholic  convents  were  recepta- 
cles of  tlie  most  flagitious  enormities.  The  bald  grossness  of 
these  fabrications,  upon  any  other  subject,  Avould  have  been 
generally  denounced  as  too  indecent  for  countenance  in  an 
intelligent  community.  Even  an  allusion  to  th.eir  contents,  in 
a  newspaper,  is  trenching  upon  ]u-opricty.  We  had  '  Secrets 
OF  Female  Coxvexts  Disclosed.'  We  liad  llebecca  Reed's 
narration  of  the  Ursulino  Convent,  burnt  down  by  Protestant 
mobbish  violence.     We  had  Maria  Monk's  monstrosities  at 


PREFACE.  XI 

Montreal.  All  these  abominations  have  been  greedily  received 
by  many  in  this  community — have  been  read  and  credited,  so 
as  to  impress  the  reader  with  the  belief  tliat  Catholicism  was 
the  monster  they  represented  it  to  be.  Refutation  was  out  of 
the  question  ;  it  would  not  be  listened  to  if  offered.  Nay,  to 
question  the  narrations  was  held  to  associate  the  questioner 
with  the  Catholics,  and  brand  him  as  a  participator  in  their 
crimes.  The  Protestant  pulpits  in  Cincinnati,  or  most  of  them, 
frequently  presented  Catliolicism  in  unfavorable  lights.  Fa- 
mily conversations  were  of  the  same  tendency.  There  was,  iu 
fact,  an  incessant  and  strong  current  running  in  one  direction 
unfavorable  to  Catholicism.  In  this  state  of  things,  Protes- 
tantism, apparently,  had  nothing  to  apprehend  in  Cincinnati. 
She  had  no  occasion  for  a  champion.  But  a  tilting  gladiator, 
on  the  field  of  religious  debate,  came  among  us,  and  an  occa- 
sion was  contrived,  by  an  inconsiderate  few,  to  invite  him  to 
an  exposition  of  Catholicism.  Hence  this  debate.  Through  it 
the  Catholics  have  been  heard,  by  hun(h'eds,  if  not  thousands, 
of  Protestants,  who  came  to  witness  the  ])rostration  of  the 
whole  fabric,  and  all  its  institutions  and  adherents,  and  wiio 
came  to  believe  the  worst  that  could  be  said  of  them.  Many  of 
these  received  new  impressions.  They  heard  the  Bishop's  ex- 
position of  the  points  of  exception,  and  they  learned  that  they 
had  believed  much  that  was  disputed,  and  had  condemned 
much  that  was  capable  of  plausible  explanation.  They  ascer- 
tained that  Mr.  Campbell  was  often  at  fault  in  his  assertions 
and  in  his  arguments.  They  saw  him  sometimes  nonplussed, 
and  often  hard  pressed.  Thus  did  they  come  to  understand 
that  there  was  a  fair  side  as  well  as  foul  one  for  Catholicism, 
and  herein  have  the  Catholics  gainedm  something,  w*hil8t  they 
have  suff'ered  in  nothing. 

"  I  do  not  regard  this  Catholic  ffcdn  as  Protestant  loss.  I 
honor  Protestantism  too  much  to  believe  she  can  be  injured  by 
the  dispersion  of  prejudice,  or  by  the  discomfiture  of  presump- 
tuous vindicators.  Ami  for  this  reason  it  is  that  I  have  repre- 
hended the  war  waged  against  the  Catholics.  It  is,  in  fact,  a 
war  afjfjressiue  not  de/'e/isive,  whether  the  operator  be  Rebec- 
ca Reed,  Maria  Monk,  or  Alexander  Catnpbell ;  whether  it  be 
waged  under  color  of  defending  Protestantism,  or  of  checking 
the  advance  of  Catholicism  ;  and  it  is  a  war  as  unwise,  in  ha 
commencement  and  in  its  continuance,  as  it  has  been  discredit- 
able in  most  of  the  agents  and  the  weapons  it  has  employed. 

"  One  of  tlie  most  gratifying  results  of  this  controversy  is, 
the  interchange  of  good  feeling  and  Christian  regard  which  it 
elicited  from  Catholic  and  Protestant.  We  were  delighted 
to  see  and  hear  the  congratulations  which  passed  between  men 
hitherto  unfortunately  estranged.  The  mists  of  prejudice 
have  been  dispei-sed,  and  we  all  were  happy  to  behold  each 


XU  PBEFACB. 

Other  in  the  pure  light  of  love,  benevolence,  and  charity.  It 
Avas  gratifying  to  observe  the  warjnth  and  sincerity  with  which 
Bishop  Purcell  was  greeted  by  his  Protestant  iellow-citizens, 
and  we  feel  assured  that  he  responded  in  the  fulness  of  his 
heart  to  their  kind  felicitations  upon  the  virtuous  triuiujjh 
which  he  has  achieved." 


It  is  thought  unnecessary  to  add  to  these  extracts  the  testi- 
mony of  other  periodicals  to  the  same  effect. 


APPENDIX. 


CORRESPONDENCE. 

(From  the  Cincinnati  Catliolic  Telegraph  of  February  28,  1837.) 
PRESENTATION  OF  PLATE, 

A  COMMITTEE  waited  on  the  Right  Rev.  Bisliop  Purcell  last  week,  and 
in  the  name  of  the  English  Catholics  of  Cincinnati,  presented  him  with 
various  articles  of  plate,  among  which  were  two  large  and  beautiful  silver 
pitchers,  bearing  the  following  inscription  : 

Presented  to  the 

RT.     REV.     BISHOP    PURCELL,     D.D., 

By  the  Roman  Catholics  of  Cincinnati,  as  a  testimonial  of  their  grati- 

■  tudejor  his  late  eloquent  and  triumpluznt  vindication 

of  their  Holy  Religion. 

The  following  correspondence  tdok  place  on  the  occasion  between 
Bishop  Purcell  and  the  Committee  : 

Cincinnati,  Washington's  Bikthday,  1837. 
Rt.  Rev.  Dr.  Purcell,  Bishop  of  Cincinnati  : 

De.\r  Sir  :  Tiie  members  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Cliurch  in  Cincinnati 
request  you  to  accept  of  the  accompanying  present  as  a  testimonial  of  their 
gratitude  lor  your  late  triumphant  defence  of  their  holy  religion.  We 
are  well  aware  that  an  imperative  sense  of  duty  could  alone  have  induced 
you  to  depart  from  the  Retirement  so  congenial  to  your  feelings,  and 
appear  as  a  controvertist  before  the  public  eye.  You  no  doubt  felt,  in 
common  with  your  Catholic  fellow-citizens,  that  the  sacred  subject  of  reli- 
gion is  better  suited  to  private  study  and  meditation  than  the  turmoil  and 
acrimony  with  which  its  public  discu88i(m  is  frequently  attended.  Occa- 
sion, however,  will  arise  when  Truth  may  be  injured  by  silence,  and  for- 
bearance ahnnst  cease  to  be  a  virtue.  Such  was  your  situation  previous 
to  the  late  controversy,  into  which  you  were  foi'ced  by  the  unjust  re- 
])roaches  with  which  your  faith,  and  that  of  an  immense  maJDrity  of  Chris- 
tians, wa.s  so  recklessly  assailed.  But  Truth,  though  always  modest  and 
unassuming,  has  an  overwhelming  power  at  her  command,  whenever  she 
chooses  to  exert  it,  in  vindication  of  her  character.  Of  this  we  had  illus- 
trious proofs  during  the  late  discussion. 

The  gratification  which  we  feel  at  the  result  of  the  debate  is  not  be- 
cause a  "wanton  assailant"  has  been  rebuked,  but  because  Truth  ha' 
achieved  so  signal  a  triumph.  To  exult  over  anyof  our  fellow-creature^ 
would  be  indicative  of  feelings  as  foreign  to  your  heart  as  they  would  b. 
to  ours  :  we  can  pity  the  advocate  of  error,  and  regret  his  delusions  ;  bur 
the  feeling  which  his  exposure  elicits  is  the  exclusive  property  of  reli 
gious  charity. 

Catliolics  have  long  endured  persecution  for  conscience'  sake.     Extra- 
ordinary and  wicked  doctrines  have  been  published  as  a  part  of  thei 
creed,  and  the  land  has  been  flooded  with  fabrications  which  are  sappin;, 
the  foundations  of  morality,  though  ostensibly  designed  to  ridicule  Caih. 
licism.      Your  eloquent  and  convincing  expo:<ition  of  our  doctrines  wi 
dis:ibu-se  honest  minds  of  their  erroneous  impressions  respecting  our  rt-" 
gion.   Tliis  happy  consequence  of  the  discussion  is  already  widely  diff  us 
throughout  the  community  in  which  we  dwell.     Even  the  minister  oi  a 


XlV  APPENDIX. 

large  and  respectable  body  of  our  dissenting  friends  hag  pnblicly  arowecl, 
that  "his  cliarity  for  the  Catholic  communion  is  considerably  enkir<;ed." 
We  sincerely  trust  that  similar  sentiments  will  pervade  the  breasts  of  our 
fellow-citizens  throughout  tlie  wi-stern  country,  and  in  every  place  to 
which  the  controversy  shall  extend.  We  yield  to  none  of  our  fellow- 
citizens  in  love  and  veneration  for  our  republican  institutions,  and  this 
devotion  to  our  coinitry  you  have  always  cherished  and  enforced.  On  this 
point,  notwithstanding  the  harsh  accusations  which  have  been  brought 
against  us,  we  feel  that  we  do  not  deserve  reproach.  May  God  preserve, 
many  years,  the  '■  peace  and  good-will  "  so  dear  to  every  sincere  ('hris- 
tian,  and  induce  the  heart  which  animosity  has  withered  to  bloom  and 
flonrJsh  with  kindlier  feelings. 

That  you  may  long  survive  to  promote  this  heavrnly  harmony,  and 
thus  confer  new  benefits  upon  society,  is  the  fervent  ])rayer  of 

Your  Fkienbs  and  Fellow -Citizens. 


CiNCiNNATr,  22(1  February,  1837. 

Beloved  Fkiends  and  Fei.,txjw-Citizens  :  I  receive,  with  peculiar 
satisfaction,  on  the  anniversary  of  the  birthday  of  Washington,  this  splen- 
did and  unsolicited  testimonial  of  your  gratitude  for  my  late  vindication 
of  the  principles  and  conduct  of  Roman  ('atholics.  I  did  not  seek  the 
controversy  to  which  you  allude.  From  nature  and  habit,  I  am  now,  as 
I  have  ever  been,  averse  to  such  exhibitions.  Religion  is  not  in  need  of 
them  :  and,  in  my  judgment,  it  is  more  congenial  v  it h  her  mild  and  holy 
spirit  faithfully  to  practice  what  we  sincerely  believe,  than  to  seek  to  ex- 
pose the  unsoundness  of  our  neighbor's  convictions,  or  to  obtrude  our 
own,  unbidden  and  unwelcome,  upon  him.  But  there  are  men  who  are 
neither  at  rest  themselves,  in  their  faith,  nor  will  they,  if  they  can,  suf- 
fer others  to  be  so.  One  of  these  I  have  latelynnet ;  and  although  I  take 
no  merit  to  myself  for  his  humiliation,  I  think  I  may  say  with  truth,  he 
by  this  time  sincerely  repents  of  his  rashness. 

Qucm  Dens  milt  perdere,  priu$  dementnt — Whom  God  intends  to  de- 
stroy, he  first  dements.  How  perfectly  this  maxim  has  been  verified  in 
the  failure  of  my  opponent,  a  reference  to  the  printed  report  of  the  con- 
troversy will  demonstrate  to  every  candid  mind.  The  present  1  consider, 
however,  a  very  suitable  occasion  for  at  least  an  allusion  to  the  prominent 
points  of  his  defeat.     These  I  reduce,  for  brevity's  sake,  to  twenty-four. 

1st.  He  pledged  himself  to  prove  that  the  "  Institution  sometimes  called 
the  Holy  Apostolic  Catholic  Church  is  not  now,  nor  was  she  ever.  Catho- 
lic, apostolic,  or  holy  ;  but  is  a  sect,  in  the  fair  import  of  that  word,  older 
than  any  other  sect  now  existing,  but  not  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all 
churches,  but  an  apostasy  from  the  only  true,  holy,  apostolic  and  Catho- 
lic Church  of  Christ."  He  also  pledged  himself  to  show  the  time  when 
and  the  j)lace  icliere  her  apostasy  commenced.  This  remarkable  event,  he 
assigned,  in  the  first  instance,  to  the  10th  of  July,  1054  ;  but  when  he 
was  asked,  which  was  the  true  Church  of  ( 'hrist  from  which  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  had  apostatized,  at  the  period  just  mentioned,  he  could 
only  reply  by  contradicting  his  previous  assertion,  and  stating  that  the 
apostasy  took  place  "  some  time  nbout  the  year2o0  !"  When  the  question 
was  again  urjjjed  upon  him  to  name  the  true  church  from  which  the 
Roman  Catholic  then  apostatized,  he  had  no  ans%yer  to  giye,  nor  has  he 
given  one  !  I  predicted  that  this  Ayoukl  puzzle  h'ui,  and  it  has  done  so 
most  eflPectually. 

2<1.  He  insulted  Protestants,  whose  champion  he  affected  to  be  consider- 
ed, by  making  a  monster-church  of  all  the  jarring,  and  many  of  them, 
impious  sects,  that  rose  and  fell  during  the  first  fifteen  centuries.     These 


APPENDIX.  XV 

he  recommended  to  their  veneration,  saying,  "  Protestants,  behold  our 
motlier  !" 

3d.  lie  undertook  to  show  when  the  Church  of  Rome  obtained  the 
primacy  of  all  the  churches,  and  stated  that  this  took  place  when  Gre- 
gory the  Great  crotoned  the  usurper,  Plwcfts,  king,  in  the  church  of  H. 
John  tlie  Baptint  at  Constantinople;  and  tiiat  Gregory  received  from  the 
gratitude  ot  Phocas  the  title  of  Universal  Bishop  as  a  reward  for  his 
share  in  the  infamy  of  the  entire  procedure.  The  gentleman  quoted  Gib- 
bon as  his  authority  for  a  statemeiit  which  I  venture  to  assert  no  man  in 
the  assembly,  learned  or  unlearned,  had  ever  heard  belore,  I  challenged 
its  glaring  inaccuracy,  and  proved  from  Gibbon,  that  Gregory  had  neither 
lot  nor  part  in  the  elevation  of  Phocas  ;  that  he  did  not  go  from  Rome  to 
Constantinople  to  crown  him ;  that  this  was  done  by  Germanus.  the 
Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  after  the  abdication  of  Mauritius  ;  that  Gre- 
gory, in  all  probability,  knew  nothing  of  the  accession  of  Phocas  until 
after  that  event  ;  finally,  that  the  soldiery  and  the  people,  not  the  Pope, 
nor  the  Patriarch,  raised  Phocas  to  the  throne  I  My  learned  opponent 
had  to  confess  that  "  he  might  have  been  mistaken." 

4th.  He  boasted  that  he  could  produce  a  Bible  taken  from  a  manuscript 
copy  of  the  Scriptures  "which  had  never  been  soiled  by  the  hand  of  a 
monk."  To  prove  this  assertion  he  quoted  the  Codex  Alexandrinus  pre- 
served in  the  Britisli  Museum,  and  containing  the  Old  Testament  of  the 
Septuagint,  and  the  New  Testament,  in  Greek,  tciVt  the  Apocrypha,  which 
Protestants  most  unreasonably  reject  I  It  happened,  however,  most  un- 
fortunately for  his  reputation  as  a  scholar,  and  to  his  own  utter  confusion, 
that  in  reading  from  Home's  Introduction  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures, 
he  traced  the  origin  of  this  manuscript  to  ONE  of  tub  23  monasteries 
ON  MoUN'T  Atiios  I  It  was  there  that  this  manuscript  was  written,  and 
appended  to  it  as  a  part  of  the  same  scroll  is  a  Psaltery  of  one  of  the 
Acoemets.*    It  was  thus  the  gentleman  established  this  proposition  ! 

5th.  My  opponent  insisted  that  it  was  as  easy  to  distinguish  genuine 
from  spurious  Scriptures,  as  it  was  to  distinguish  the  meridian  sun  in  J,ho 
heavens.  On  this  point  he  was  shown  to  be  diametrically  opposed  to  tho 
most  learned  Protestant  divines,  who  maintain  that  we  can  no  otherwise 
deteri):ine  the  books  of  Scripture  than  by  the  authority  of  the  primitive 
Church.  History  attests  that  the  most  serious  difficulties  have  been  en- 
countered in  determining  the  Canonical  books  of  Scripture,  but  in  the 
theory  of  my  opponent,  the  existence  of  any  such  difficulty  would  have 
been  impossible.  He  forgot  that  Luther  found  no  such  evidence  for  the 
Epistle  of  St.  James,  which  he  called  "  an  Epistle  of  straw"  and  that,  as 
the  learned  Protestant  Bishop  of  Kentucky  says,  "  There  is  not  a  '  Tiiiis 
saith  the  Lord,"  to  vouch  for  the  authenticity  of  any  book  of  Scripture." 

6th.  He  charged  tho  Catholic  creed  with  immorality,  because  the  priest 
says.  "  I  absolve  thee,"  not  recollecting  that  the  English  Episcopal  Bouk  of 
Common  Prayer  directs  the  Minister  of  that  Churcli  to  say  the  same — and 
with  same  intent,  viz. :  to  release  the  penitent  from  his  sins,  in  virtue  (jf  a 
divine  power.  He  could  not  discover  any  greater  immorality  or  asi^uuiD- 
tion  of  divine  power  in  the  words  of  the  Catholic  priest,  "  I  absolve 
(loose)  thee  f.om  thy  sins,  or  thy  sins  from  thee,  in  the  name  of  tho 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  than  in  his  own  words 
when  he  goes  into  the  river  with  a  Campbellite  Catechumen,  and  says, 
while  he  immerses  him,  "  I  baptize  (wash)  thee  from  thy  sins,  in  the 

*  The  Accemets  were  n  class  of  monks  in  the  ancient  chnrch.  who  flourished,  parM- 
cularly  111  ihe  East,  (luriuir  tlie  fifth  century.  Tliey  were  so  called  because  they  had 
Divine  Fcrvice  peiforrsu'd  witlioiit  interruption  in  tiicir  churches.  They  divided  them- 
selves into  three  bodies,  each  of  which  ottici'itod  in  turn,  and  relieved  the  others,  so 
that  their  churches  wevc  never  silent,  either  day  or  ni?;ht.  Wetsteiii  adopts  the  opinion 
of  C:isimir  Gudia,  Ihat  the  Cudt^x  A!exanihi:iu"s  was  written  by  an  Accemct.  beciusc  it 
contains  a  cafcilogne  of  the  psalm.H  th^it  were  to  be  saiiu'  at  evcrv  hour  of  the  day  and 
night.    Proleg.  in  Nov.  Tetf.  vol.  p.  10.    ^Home's  Iniroduction,  p.  223.) 


XVI  ArPElSDIX. 

name,"  etc.,  and  coming  oat  of  the  stream  says,  "The  Ohio  has  carried 
awiiy  liis  sins  !" 

7th.  He  said,  in  the  liearinj;  of  nearly  3000  person?,  that  the  Bardstowa 
Catholic  Advocnte,  and  hj  implication  the  Catholic  Bishop  of  Bardstowii, 
had  admitted  th.it  the  Jansenist  Du  Piu  was  an  authentic  Catholic  his- 
torian ;  whereas,  a.s  I  have  shown  him,  so  that  he  had  not  a  word  to  say 
for  himself  by  way  of  excuse,  the  Baidstown  Adcocate,  as  I  shall  publish 
in  the  appendix  to  the  controversy,  says  no  suckthin^,  but  says  the  very 
contrary  ! 

8th.  He  asserted  that  I  could  not  adduce  the  testimony  of  a  sinprle 
Catholic  historian  to  prove  that  Osius  presided  as  the  Legate  of  Pope  Sil- 
vester at  the  Council  of  Xice.  I  quoted  the  most  explicit  and  convincing 
testimony  to  this  effect,  from  Baronius,  Noel,  Alexander,  Fleury,  etc.; 
and  thus,  before  the  public,  showed  his  learning  at  fault,  on  this  point, 
as  on  many  others, 

9th.  He  confounded  the  two  men  named  Scotus,  both  remarkable  per- 
sonages in  Ecclesiastical  history  ;  one  living  in  the  9th,  the  other  in 
the  14th  century,  one  a  heretic,  the  other  an  orthodox  divine  ;  and 
when  cliallengcd  by  me  to  say  who  Scotus  was,  he  replied,  "  Ipresmne 
he  vas  some  Father  of  the  Church  /" 

10th.  He  denied  that  there  could  have  been  any  truth  in  the  Catholic 
Church,  because  there  were  a  few  bad  Popes  in  the  Apostolic  succession 
at  Rome  ;  and  I  confounded  him  by  showing  that  the  succession  of  the 
Saviour's  blood  was  not  pure  ;  that  there  were  murderers  and  drunkards 
and  adulterers  in  David's  royal  line,  and  among  the  Patriarchs,  whom 
God  had  chosen  as  the  sole  depositaries  of  truth,  the  witnesses  of  the 
truth,  the  heralds  of  the  truth,  under  the  written  and  the  unwritten  law! 
and  that  his  argument  was  still  more  subversive  of  the  Bible  and  of  Cliris- 
tianity  than  of  the  Catholic  Religion  ;  that  her  divinity  was  never  more 
evident  than  in  the  fact  that  the  number  of  those  bad  Popes  was  so  very 
small,  that  none  of  them  eter  taught  false  doctrine  ;  that  they  faitlifiilly 
spread  the  liuht  of  the  Gospel-truih  tlirough  Pagan  and  Infidel  climes  ; 
that  by  a  sjiecial  i)rovidence  of  God,  no  heresy  or  defection  of  any  con- 
siderable body  of  Catholics  afflicted  the  Church  during  their  ])ontificates  ; 
that  it  matters  not  so  much  to  us,  greatly  as  we  desire  the  ministers  of 
our  holy  religion  to  honor  their  exalted  station,  and  strongly  as  we  con- 
demn tiiem  if  they  do  not,  whether  the  conduit  tliat  conveys  to  us  the 
pure  and  crystal  stream  of  heavenly  doctrine  be  of  gold,  of  silver,  or  of 
some  baser  metal  ;  finally,  that  Jesus  Christ  foretold  that  such  scandals 
should  come,  but  that  they  should  not  PREVAlli ;  and  that  in  the  ex- 
emplar, the  first  tribunal  of  Ecclesiastical  authority  in  his  newly  found- 
ed Church,  in  his  own  College  of  Cardinals,  he  allowed  us  to  behold  a 
traitor,  a  profaner  of  the  sacraments,  a  suicide,  a  perjured  apostle,  and  a 
band  of  coward  disciples,  who  fled  from  the  stricken  shepherd,  that  when 
scandals  not  quite  so  bad  should  come  to  pass,  we  should  not  vacillate  or 
waver  in  faith,  fortliathe  was  still  with  us,  and  that  with  him  we  had  all 
things,  and  could  see  the  power  of  his  grace  in  hundreds  and  thousands 
of  the  clergy  and  saints,  in  the  very  worst  of  times  who  never  bowed  the 
knee  to  Baal ;  that  storms  are  as  necessary  in  the  spiritual  as  in  the  phy- 
sical world,  to  purify  the  face  of  Heaven  ;  that  as  the  d>ctHne  of  Jesus 
Christ  could  never  need  to  be  amended,  reformation  should  have  taken 
place  in  the  Church,  not  oxit  of  it;  that  God  permitted  our  faith  to  be  tried 
like  that  of  Abraham,  that  we  may  know  that  He  who  founded  the 
Church  was  able  to  preserve  her,  and  that,  as  in  past  times,  no  cloud 
]iad  ever  loicered  orcr  the  Church,  that  the  rainbow  of  jiromise  did  not 
shine  through  tlie  gloom,  so  neither  would  His  mercy  fail  us,  till  we  reach- 
ed the  consummation  of  ages,  in  the  unity  of  faith.  "  The  heavens  and 
the  earth  shall  pass  away,  but  His  word  shall  never  pass  away." 

11th.  lie  held  up  a  strip  of  soiled  and  smoked 'newspaper,  which  after 


APPENDIX.  XVU 

yi'ara  of  safe-kee.pin<r  some  enliglitened  friend  of  the  fifentleman  produced 
"  to  do  battle"  in  tins  debate  ;  and  he  was  so  ijifnoraut  that  he  told  the 
audience,  whli  an  air  of  triumph,  that  he  lield  in  liis  liand  tlie  actual  form 
of  cursing  n&ed  in  the  Catholic  Churcli,  aye,  by  tlie  Bisliopot  Philadelphia 
in  the  United  States,  against  a  fallen  priest.  Now,  what  were  the  facts 
of  the  case?  Why  that  a  Catliolic  never  wrote  the  like  ;  that  the  Catho- 
lic Church  never  used  the  like  ;  that  a  Protestant  minister,  Sterne,  lorote 
it;  that  it  ia.  all  to  be  found  in  Tristram  Shandy,  one  of  the  most  obscene 
books  in  the  English  language,  which,  however,  I  procured  from  a  book- 
store before  the  gentleman  had  finished  his  speech,  exhibited  and  in  part 
read  to  the  audience,  with  the  LiLLiBULTiARO  of  his  hero.  Dr.  Slop,  at  the 
beginninij  of  the^e  curses,  until  the  whole  assembly  was  convulsed,  at  the 
expense  of  my  friend  and  to  the  glory  of  truth  (quid  vetat  ridentemdicere 
verum  ?)  with  inextinguishable  laughter.  He  did  not  intentionally,  but 
by  a  mistake,  honor  the  Catholic  Church  with  this  decent  composition. 
The  whole  is  an  injurious  caricature  of  the  cuilses  in  the  28th  ch.  of 
Deut.  3. 

12th.  He  produced,  as  an  authentic  and  approved  Catholic  Testament, 
an  edition  thereof  irith  notes,  published  by  a  band  of  Protestant  ))arson3 
in  New-York  (who  no  doubt,  like  the  Maria  Monk  coterie,  are  condenmed 
by  their  brethren).  I  exposed  this  fraud,  read  the  names  of  some  of  the 
parsons  aloud,  and  the  condemnation  of  those  very  notes  by  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Dublin. 

13th.  He  quoted  the  Ven.  and  sainted  Liguori,  translated  by  a  New- 
York  religious  changeling,  for  a  charge  of  the  most  indecent  kind  against 
the  Catholic  Church.  Mr.  Alex.  Kinmont,  an  honorable  man,  a  scholar, 
and,  as  I  have  learned,  a  Swedenborgian,  generously,  at  the  solicitation, 
I  may  presume  to  say,  of  the  entire  meeting,  came  on  the  platform  and 
showed  there  was  nothing  of  it  in  the  place  of  Liguori's  works  to  which 
Smith  referred  ;  that  the  contrary  was  in  another  place,  with  a  citation  of 
the  chapter  in  the  Council  of  Trent,  which  Mr.  Kinmont  translated  for 
the  house,  which  condemns  and  denounces,  in  the  strongest  language  it 
could  employ,  the  imputed  immorality. 

14th.  He  quoted  a  work  "decorrupto  Ecclesiae  Statu,"  for  a  description 
of  Catholic  immoralities,  and  gave  into  the  stale  slander,  as  if  it  had 
been  written  by  a  Catholic  Archdeacon,  Nicholas  de  Ciemangis,  whereas 
the  author  was  never  known,  being  ashamed  to  put  his  name  to  the  in- 
famous production.  All  critics  agree  that  the  Archdeacon  had  notliing 
to  do  with  the  work.  John  de  Chelin  and  John  of  Bavaria,  not  to  speak 
of  many  others,  have  had  successively  the  honor  or  shame  of  its  author- 
ship. 

15th.  He  quoted  Bellarmine,  as  saying  that  St.  Veter  w&s  "  probably" 
Bishop  of  Rome,  thus  making  this  universally  acknowledged  fact  a  mere 
probahility  ;  whereas  Bellarmine  says  positively  that  he  was  Bishop  of 
Rome,  and  that  it  was  vei'y  probable  that  he  transferred  his  See  from 
Antioch  to  that  city  by  the  express  command  of  Jesus  Christ,  which,  you 
perceive,  is  a  very  different  proposition. 

IGth.  Ho  charged  Catholics  with  being  hostile  to  civil  and  religious 
liberty  ;  whereas,  as  I  proved  to  him.  Catholics  were  the  first  that  ever  pro- 
claimed Liberty  of  Conscience  in  the  Western  Hemisphere,  viz.,  the  Catholic 
colony  of  Maryland,  among  whom  Protestants,  xclien  persecuted  by  Protest- 
ants,for  conscience'  sake,  sought  and  found  a  refuge.  I  told  himof  Venice 
for  so  many  centuries  a  Catholic  and  a  glorious  republic — the  commercial 
Britain  of  former  ages — San  Marino — South-American  Republics,  William 
Tell,  Kosciusko,  and  the  free  Cant'US  of  Switzerland. 

17th.  H(^  accused  the  Catholic  Church  with  holding  persecuting  doc- 
trines, the  Inquisition,  etc. ,  etc.  I  refuted  this  oft-repeated  charge  by 
showing  him  that  no  general  council  had  ever  enacted  a  single  canon  au- 
thorizing persecution  ;  that  Catholics  would  not  be  bound  by  their  religion 


XVIU  APPENDIXr 

to  obey  it.  if  it  did,  for  that  siicli  lejjislation  would  be  a  manifest  Iraiis- 
cendinor,  on  the  pari  of  the  Church,  of  the  powers  j^ranted  ber  by  Jesus 
Christ  ;  that  it  is,  cous^equently,  no  part  of  Cailioiic  faitli.  Tliat  we  ac- 
knowledfje  uo  doctrine  a;*  an  article  ot  Cailiolic  faiili  but  wliat  lias  been 
believed  "  always,  EVKKYWUEUii;,  and  by  all,"  and  that  the  Inquisi- 
tion was  unknown  and  has  neoer  been  received  in  many  parts  of  tiie  Ca- 
tholic Cliurcli,  which  could  not  be  tlie  case  if  it  were  Catholic  doctrine  ; 
that,  where  the  civil  pmcer  estalilished  it,  as  iu  the  instauge  of  Spain 
against  the  desolating  ravages  of  Moharaniedana  and  Moors,  by  vvliom 
that  rich  and  luxuriant  country  had  been  so  olten  swept,  as  with  the  be- 
som of  destruction,  it  did  not  almiys  exi^t  and  ne^'er  was  held  to  be  so 
much  as  a  fragment  of  Catholic  faith  ;  tliat  a  Protestant  country 
has  had,  and  has  Htill,  as  bloody,  if  not  a  bloodier,  Inquisition  and 
other  persecuting  enactments,  tribunals,  institutions,  and  laws,  as 
ever  disgraced  the  annals  of  Spain.  To  prove  these  alleiiata,  I  quoted, 
not  Catholic  historians,  but  Hume,  in  his  account  of  the  Star-C'haniber, 
Taylor  in  his  history  of  Ireland,  Cobbitt's  Protestant  Reformation, 
Dewey,  a  Unitarian,  etc.,  etc.  From  these  incontrovertible  evidences, 
and  would  to  God  theie  were  no  others,  it  is  clearly  seen  that  there  was 
an  Inquisition,  and  that  there  now  is  persecuiion  undt^r  the  Protestant 
Government  of  England,  not  to  mention  others,  which  have  slain  their 
tens  of  thousands,  and  keep  eioht  millions  of  people  in  a  state  of  gall- 
ing slavery  to  which  death  itself  would,  until  late  partial  mitigaticns, 
have  been  mercy  !  There,  still,  tliat  system  of  making  the  poor  Catliolic 
peasantry  pay  the  tithe  of  all  they  ]>ossess  to  support  the  luxurious,  fnx- 
huuting  preachers  of  a  different  religion,  for  defaming  their  own,  subsists 
in  all  its  blushing  horrors.  My  friend  called  it  a  dying  system  ;  and  so  it 
is.  It  has  dyed  the  green  fielus  red,  over  which  I  have  strayed,  as  he  has 
done,  in  boyhood's  careless  hour  ;  it  has  made  a  icidoic  irantic  for  the 
death  of  her  last,  her  only  son  I  It  has  made  her  kneel  down,  a  maniac, 
in  that  son's  blood,  and  having  drunk  it,  curse,  with  ensanguined  lips, 
his  Revererul  murderer  !  This  is  but  a  solitary  case.  Can  the  annals  ot 
cruelty  furnish  a  parallel'? 

18th.  He  made  a  mighty  bluster  about  Antichrist,  and  G66,  and  mon- 
sters, and  kingdoms,  and  eyes  and  horns,  etc..  etc.,  and  I  pnjved  to  him 
that  as  one  of  the  most  clearly  revealed  marks  of  Antichrist  is  to  "  deny  the 
Father  and  the  Son"  the  Pope,  who  acknowledges  bcth,  ciiunot  be  Anti- 
christ. That  all  the  prophecies  of  the  downfall  of  a  church,  agaiuf^t  which 
Christ  promised  that  the  gates  of  hell  should  never  prevail,  ])redicatcd 
upon  the  texts  referring  to  this  mysterious  character,  have  failed  of  their 
accomplishment,  although  they  were  excessively  eloquent,  and  very  minute 
in  incidents  and  circumstantial  in  details.  I  have  not  time  to  show  siill 
more  how  ridiculous  the  whole  theory  appeared,  but  paiticularly  the  admis- 
sion that  the  reign  of  Antichrist,  the  mystery  of  iniquity  was  intcriorily 
working  in  the  time  of  St.  Paul,  and  that  it  was  to  last  1260  years. 
"Whereas  the  Papacy,  as  the  gentleman  ciills  our  holy  religion,  has  lasted 
eighteen  hundred  years,  and  bids  fair  for  a  few  more  hundreds,  before 
she  reach  the  consummation  of  ages  !  The  numerals  on  which  so 
much  stress  was  laid  by  my  opponent  are  the  [.roduct  of  every  one  of 
fourteen  usiine?,  and  among  the  rest  of  God  himself;  the  winged  mon- 
sters were  used  by  Ezekiel  as  the  imagery  of  the  divine  messengers  ; 
the  devastations  of  Mohammed  show  the  ravages  of  the  man  of  Sin  ;  ancl 
the  various  sects  and  schisms  that  have  afflicted  the  Church,  and  torn 
from  it  large  portions  of  some  nations,  while  in  others  she  extended  her 
conquests  and  received  new  nati  >ns  into  her  fold,  are  plainly  enough 
marked  as  the  forerunners  of  Antichrist,  who,  towards  the  end  of  all 
things,  is  to  war  more  formidably  than  ever  upon  the  saints.  This  is 
the  dread  time  to  which  Christ  alluded  when  he  said,  "  When,  the  Sm  of 
man  will  come,  think  you  will  he  find  faith  upon  tlie  earth  ?"  (Luke  xviii. 


APPENDIX.  XIX 

8.)  Tliat  coming  event  casts  its  sliadow  before  I  Opinion  Tuts  supplant- 
ed faith.  Every  mountebank,  too  idle  to  work,  and  liaving  just  learning 
enough  to  deceive,  but  too  proud  himself  to  learn,  scales  the  walls  of  the 
sheepfold,  usurps  the  place  of  pastor  over  credulous  and  deluded  congre- 
gations, and,  unsent  and  uncommissioned,  preaches  his  own  crude  fancies 
for  the  word  of  God.  They  proscribe  authority  and  arrogate  a  power 
which  no  Poi>e  has  ever  yet  pretended  to,  and  make  dupes  of  whom  no  ori- 
gimd  can  be  found  among  the  members  of  the  Catholic  Church.  They 
believe  an  isolated,  inconsistent, and  often  ignorant  preacher,  whose  hand 
is  against  every  sect,,  and  every  sect's  hand  against  him,  while  Catholics 
hear  the  Church  of  all  nations  and  ages,  founded  by  Christ,  and  perpetu- 
ally assisted  unto  the  teaching  of  all  truth  by  his  holy  Spirit.  It  is  thus 
that  the  Methodists  of  this  city,  while  Mr.  Campbell  is  fighting  against 
Catholics,  as  the  soi-dlsant  champion  of  Protestantism,  are  actually  ejy- 
posing  himaelf  and  "  Campbellisni  "  in  stereotype,  at  the  very  oflBce  where 
tbe  late  discussion  is  being  published.  We  have  seen  how  the  Episco- 
palians have  spurned  his  advocacy  and  eschew  his  errors — and  yet  he  is  a 
Bible  C/wistian  ;  that  is  to  say,  he  puts  it  to  the  rack  and  makes  it  say 
whatever  he  pleases.  This  is  the  antichristian  audacity  with  the  words 
of  Scripture,  the  mystery  of  iniquity  inwardly  working,  the  volcanic  lique- 
faction melting  the  hills  of  human  pride,  and  preparing  the  grave,  the 
catastrophe  to  which  all  sectarianism  tends,  namely,  the  abyss  of  infide- 
lity. ''Think  you,"  says  Jesus  Christ,  "when  lie  cmncth,  tiie  Son  of  man 
vMl  find  faith  upon  the  earth  ?" 

19th.  Waiving  the  arguments  from  the  history  of  the  Church,  or  tradi- 
tion, and  as  far  as  the  test  of  reason  could  be  applied  to  revealed  religion, 
I  defied  my  opponent  to  find  so  many  clear  texts  of  scHpture  against  any 
one  of  our  tenets,  as  I  could  aileye  in  its  favor,  and  although  he  labored 
hard,  and  became  quite  hoarse,  he  could  not  do  so.  He  most  egregiously 
failed,  and  took  to  talking  about  "  drops  of  grace  aud  scuttle-fish,  and 
fish/!" 

20th.  He  says  :  "  It  is  then  without  law,  precedent,  or  authority  to  say 
that  the  passage  '  t/iin  is  my  body'  means  that  bread  is  converted  into 
flesh  ;"  that  is  to  say,  that  Christ  means  what  he  says,  and  that,  too,  at 
the  most  solemn  crisis  of  his  mortal  life  !  This  very  argument  the  Qui- 
tarian  will  retort  upon  him,  for  the  words  "  this  is  my  beloved  Son," 
and  my  opponent  must  either  give  up  the  gi"eat  dogma  of  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  or  turn  Catholic,  to  be  able  to  defend  it. 

21st.  He  says  :  "  St.  Clement,  St.  Ignatius,  and  St  Irenaeus,  and  all 
the  other  saints  in  the  Roman  Calendar  (did  he  reflect  that  the  apostles 
are  of  the  nunxber  ?)  were  born  too  late  to  sanction  any  article  of  faith, 
or  morals,  by  their  vote."  And  yet  We  can  no  otherwise  than  "  by  tlieir 
vote  "  determine  the  most  important  of  all  questions  for  a  Protestant — 
Whttt  is  Si-riptut'e  ?  By  the  side  of  the  foregoing,  place  the  other  horn 
of  the  dilemma,  viz. :  "  Luther  insisted  that  the  epistle  of  St.  James 
was  not  inspired  Scripture  at  all,  that  it  was  no  better  than  straw  ;'"  aud 
the  gentleman  will  stay  sticking  on  these  two  horns  until  doomsday. 
"  The  sun  and  moon  and  planets  "  can  neither  help  nor  extricate  him. 
Besides,  the  foregoing  language  concerning  the  holy  Fathers  is  offen- 
sive to  Episcopalians  as  well  as  to  Catholics.  What  will  they  say  of 
their  "cliampion"?  Will  tliey  not  say  that  Alexander  Campbell  was 
born  too  late  to  teach  Bible-readers  the  religion  of  the  Bible  ? 

23d.  My  opponent  borrowed  largely  from  the  Sermons  published  in 
England  on  "Indulgences."  He  g-mnted  himself  a  plenary  license  to  ap- 
propriate the  "overplus  of  t fie  foreign  suints'  goml  works,"  in  aV)u?ii)g 
Catholics  on  this  su!)ject.  But  does  the  gentleman  not  recollect  that 
there  are  Catholic  divines  who  furnish  us  useful  hints  for  de;::poiling 
these  new-fangled  saints  of  a  few  of  their  rays?  Must  I  teach  him  a 
new  lesson  in  theology  on  Protectant  indulgences  granted  for  money,  or 


XX  APPENDIX. 

something  worse,  by  all  the  Protestant  sects  ?  Let  us  come  to  the  proof, 
and  hfghi  with  the  jolly  patriarch  Luther.  The  Scripture  says,  that 
they  who  break  their  vows  Juive  damnation,  and  that  it  is  better  not  to  vow 
at  all  than  to  break  a  tow.  Luther  interpreted  these  texts  to  mean  the 
contrary.  He  gave  himself  and  Catharine  Boren  an  indulgence  to  break 
their  vows  and  j>erpetrate  matrimony.  What  lie  said  in  his  sermon  on 
marriage,  t.  v.  of  his  works,  "si  iiolit  domiiia,  teniat  nncilla,"  I  will 
lesive  to  my  worthy  opponent  to  translate.  He  clubbed  with  Bucer  and 
Melancthon  to  lotigh  maturely  llie  reasons  alleged  by  I'hilip,  Landgrave 
of  Hesse,  for  having  two  wives  at  one  and  the  same  time,  and  the  trio 
thought  the  reasons  were  solid,  and  tfwy  let  him  have  them.  This  infa- 
mous indulgence  and  the  deeds  belonging  to  it  were  published  from  the 
original  by  permission  of  a  descendant  of  the  landgrave.  Bucer  him- 
self, who  was  invited  to  England  by  C'ranmer  and  Somerset,  says  tho 
whole  business  of  the  Reformation  was  an  indulgence  for  libertinism. 
His  words  are  these  :  "  The  greater  part  of  the  jieople  seemed  to  have 
embraced  the  Gospel,  in  order  to  shake  off  the  yoke  of  discipline  and 
the  obligation  of  fasting,  penance,  etc.,  which  lay  upon  them  in  popery, 
and  to  live  at  their  pleasure,  enjoying  their  lusts  and  lawless  appetites 
without  control.  Hence,  they  lent  a  willing  ear  to  the  doctrine  that  we 
are  saved  by  faith  alone,  and  not  by  good  works,  having  no  relish  for 
them." — Bucer  de  Regno  Chrisii,  lib.  i.  c.  4. 

The  Anabaptists  claimed  an  indulgence  from  God  himself,  in  quality 
of  his  chosen  ones,  to  despoil  the  impious,  viz.  :  all  the  rest  of  mankind 
of  their  property.  .  .  .  "  It  is  a  most  pernicious  error,"  says  the 
Calvinist,  Sir  Richard  Hill,  "  to  distinguish  sins  according  to  the  fact, 
and  not  according  to  the  person." — Fletcher's  Checks,  vol.  iii. 

The  Church  of  England  has  likewise  some  weighty  sins  upon  her  con- 
science touching  this  matter.  We  know  what  Henry  VIII.  did  with  his 
wives  ;  how  their  bh  eding  heads  stopped  up  the  avenue  to  a  reconcilia- 
tion with  Rome.  The  Pope  refusid  him  an  indulgence  for  love  or  money ; 
but  Cranmer  was  less  rigid  with  his  majesty.  He  granted  him  divorce 
after  divorce,  until,  like  the  murderous  Herod,  lus  hog  and  his  son,  it 
would  have  been  better  for  Henry's  wife  to  have  been  any  thing  else! 
But  the  monarch  had  to  be  indulged  in  these  wlute  lies  and  peccadilloes  ! 
Pass  we  to  the  Canons  of  the  Church  of  England  ?  Sparrow,  Anno 
Domini  1534,  p.  134,  and  1597,  pp.  247-252.  The  Canons  he  quotes  are 
on  the  subject  of  indulgences  and  the  use  that  is  to  be  made  of  the  money 
paid  for  them.  In  the  synod  of  1640,  a  Canon  was  made  which  autho- 
rized the  employment  of  commutation  money,  namely,  of  such  sums  as 
were  paid  for  indulgences  from  ecclesiastical  courts,  not  only  in  chari- 
table, but  also  in  public  uses.  You  would  imagine  this  Canon  was  writ- 
ten with  a  pen  that  had  been  used  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  so  much 
does  it  resemble  the  language  which  was  translated  for  us  from  the  de- 
crees of  that  Council,  by  Mr.  Kinmont.  "  No  Chancellor,  Commissary, 
or  official,  shall  have  power  to  commute  any  penance,  in  whole  or  in 
part ;  but  either,  together  with  the  bishop,  etc.,  that  he  shall  give  a  full 
and  just  account  of  such  commutations  to  the  bishop,  who  shall  see 
that  all  such  moneys  shall  be  disposed  of  for  charitable  and  public  uses 
according  to  law — saving  always  to  ecclesiastical  officers  their  due  and 
accnstomable  fees." — Can.  14.  p.  368  of  Sparrow.  At  this  period,  says 
Milner  (p.  263),  the  established  clergy  were  devoting  all  the  money  they 
could  any  way  procure  to  the  war  which  Charles  I.  was  preparing,  in 
defence  of  the  Church  against  the  Presbyterians  of  Scotland  and  Eng- 
land. A  real  crusade  !  In  the  "grievances"  presented  by  a  committee 
of  the  Irish  Parliament  to  this  same  Charles  I.,  one  was,  "  that  several 
bishops  (of  the  Church  of  England)  received  great  sums  of  money  for 
commutation  of  penance  (that  is,  for  indulgences)  which  they  converted 
to  their  own  use." — Commons  Journal,  Curry,  vol.  i.  p.  160.     How  many 


APPENDIX.  .  XXI 

of  our  dissenting  brethren,  attending  the  late  debate,  who  never  heard, 
mucli  less  read,  these  statements  before  ! 

3;M.  The  gentleman  made  the  i^eople  the  source  of  all  power,  spiritual 
and  temporal.  Now,  by  this  rule,  the  Catholics,  having  on  their  side 
the  grand  majority  of  Christians,  their  voice,  according  to  his  maxim, 
"  Vox  poptdi  cox  Dei,"  should  be  considered  the  voice  of  God.  But  if, 
by  this  adage,  he  means  every  separate  congregation  must  settle  tlieir 
doctrines  and  discipline  for  themselves,  then  the  voice  of  one  congrega- 
tion will  be  the  voice  of  the  Devil,  and  not  of  God,  or  they  will  both  be 
the  voice  of  God,  and  contradict  one  another  !  ! 

24th.  But  the  most  astonishing  of  all  the  gentleman's  forced  admis- 
sions remains  to  be  told.  He,  wno  accused  Catholics  of  being  liostile-to 
free  governments,  declared  General  Washington  and  the  officers  and 
soldiers  of  our  revolutionary  army  and  all  who  aided  and  abetted  them, 
perjurers  !  And  as  might  can  never  give  Hght,  and  there  is  no  prescrip- 
tion whore  there  has  been  fraud,  we  are  still  in  a  state  of  perjury  and 
damnable  revolt  against  the  mother  country,  according  to  the  theology 
of  my  opponent.  I  do  not  believe  he  thinks  so — but  I  drove  him,  step 
by  step,  into  the  abyss,  and,  down  there,  have  we  heard  him  make  this 
lx)litico-ecclesiastical  profession  of  faith — "  Quod  optanti  mihi  nemo  pro- 
mittere  auderet,  en  dies  attulit  ultra."  I  thought,  before  the  debate 
began,  this  would  be  a  poser;  but  I  had  no  idea  he  would  have  so  com- 
mitted himself  before  the  American  public,  in  his  zeal  to  criminate  my 
creed.  The  different  situations  in  which  the  Pope  was  placed,  when 
reference  was  made  to  him  by  the  Catholics  of  England  and  Germany, 
when  their  kings  had  become  tyrants,  will  be  found  fully  stated  in  its 
proper  place  in  the  debate. 

I  should  never  end  if  I  undertook  to  enumerate  all  the  blunders  and 
vices  of  the  gentleman's  logic.  They  are,  many  of  them,  transparent 
to  healthy  eyes.  Such  as  this  logical  phenomenon — "  The  Pagan  Em- 
perors and  Christian  Princes  sometimes  decided  who  was  the  true  Pope, 
when  a  faction  strove  to  oppose  to  him  an  Antipope.  But  these  emperors 
and  kings  were  not  infallible,"  etc.  Now,  my  friends,  it  so  happened 
that  the  Pagan  and  the  Catholic  historians,  who  narrate  these  facts,  take 
care  to  state  at  the  same  time,  as  if  their  hand  was  guided  by  the 
Almighty,  for  our  instruction,  that  those  princes  said,  "Let  him  he  Pope 
whom  the  majority  of  the  Bishops  shall  agree  to  accept."  They  applied 
the  Catholic  principle.  In  the  case  of  an  inferior  bishop,  they  answered, 
"  Let  the  Bishop  of  Rome  and  Italy  decide !  He  shall  be  bishop  whom 
they  shall  say."  In  speaking  of  the  vices  of  Popes,  my  worthy  opponent 
always  took  care  to  exhibit  the  darkest  side  of  the  picture.  I  notice 
this,  that,  from  one  case,  the  audience  may  learn  all,  in  the  instance  of 
Vigilius,  who  resolutely  refused,  when  made  Pope,  to  do  the  wrong 
which  ambition  had  tempted  him  (for  Satan  tempted  Christ  himself  by 
ambition,  when  he  promised  to  give  him  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth 
and  the  glory  thereof)  to  promise  to  the  Empress  of  Constantinople.  He 
suffered  every  kind  of  persecution  and  ill-treatment  sooner  than  acquiesce 
in  her  wicked  designs.  Of  the  justice  of  the  above  remark,  we  have 
another  illustration  in  the  case  of  Benedict  IX.  who  was  obtruded  by 
his  father,  Albert,  Count  of  Tusculum,  into  the  Papal  chair,  at  the  age 
of  twelve  years — the  age  at  tchirh  Jesus  Christ  disputed  icith  the  doctors 
in  the  Temple,  for  people  then,  as  now,  quoted  Scripture  for  every  thing. 
Now,  what  are  the  data  of  history  respecting  this  matter  ?  Why,  that  the 
Koman  people,  clergy,  and  laity  drove  him  from  Rome ;  that  he  retired 
intf)  a  monaster}',  where  he  died  doing  penance  for  his  sins.  This  con- 
siderably alters  the  question.  , 

My  friends,  I  must  bring  this  letter  to  a  conclusion,  although  I  have 
yet  many  things  to  say  to  you  and  the  public  But  they  are  enlightened 
judges,  and  thoy  will  not  shut  their  eyes  to  the  truths  which  this  dis- 


XXU  APPENDIX. 

cussion  was  the  first  fair  opportunity  afEorded  them  of  seeing.  All  their 
lives,  thev  have  had  odious  luisrepreseutations  of  our  Holy  Religion  iu 
their  hauds,  Peter  Parley,  Fox's  B(X>k  of  Martyrs,  Key  to  Popery,  etc., 
etc.  They  will  now  learn  how  much  they  have  l)een  imposed  u|X)n  ;  and 
if  they  do  not  become,  what  I  earnestly  pray  God  they  may  become, 
sound,  practical,  and  pious  Catholics,  they  will,  at  least,  perceive  that  it 
is  i>erfectly  possible  to  be  attached  to  Protestantism,  and  yet  allow 
that  the  (.'aiholics  have  been  grossly  slandered.  When  such  men  as 
Southey  and  VVaddington,  and  Parr  and  Johnson,  not  to  speak  of  many 
others,  do  us  justice,  no  orthodox  disbeliever  iu  our  doctrines  need  to  find 
them  or  their  professors  less  good  than  th<y  ought  to  be.  Tlds  city  has 
had  lucid  proofs  what  jjood  people  the  Catholic  Religion  makes  :  old  Mr. 
M.  Scott,  Mr.  Patrick  Reily,  Dr.  Hugh  Bonner,  whose  honesty,  kind- 
heartedness,  industrious  habits,  and  unblemished  morals  are  embalmed 
in  the  memories  of  all  our  fellow-citizens.  (I  was  called  to  the  death- 
bed of  the  last  mentioned  exemplary  Christian  and  skilful  ]ihysician, 
while  writing  this  letter.  Hence  I  resume  and  complete  it,  barely  in 
time  for  this  week's  paper.)  "  By  their  fruits  you  shall  know  them," 
was  one  of  the  tests  proposed  by  the  Saviour.     We  appeal  to  ours. 

Never  has  a  jwlemic  been  allowed  more  advantages  than  I  have  allow- 
ed my  opponent.  The  propositions  which  he  brought  into  the  debate 
were  all  of  his  own  choosing.  The  7«o(fe  and  orde r  of  their  pre.sentaiion 
to  the  public  and  in  which  they  were  afterwards  changed  to  and  fro  on 
the  very  morninff  of  the  fii'st  day's  debate  were  his  :  I  did  not  attack  his 
creed,  or  any  other  man's.  I  waived  all  the  advantages  of  carrying  the 
war,  in  military  phrase,  into  the  "enemies'  territory."  I  received  all 
his  fire,  and  he  affected  to  consider  himself  "  the  great  gun  of  Protes- 
tantism." If  he  received  a  few  ghastly  wounds,  and  every  one  of  them 
fatal  to  his  whole  system,  it  was  iu  the  rebound,  or  because  his  metal 
was  overcharged.  His  arguments  would  prove  too  much.  They  would 
annihilate  the  Bible,  because  some  of  its  Patriarchs  and  Kings,  and 
other  personages,  were  bad  men.  They  would  destroy  Christianity,  for 
its  professors  have  not  always  done  it  credit.  They  would  destroy  the 
Protestant  sects,  for  they  included  them  who  are  very  much  like  the 
rest  of  their  frail  fellow-creatures. 

Toil  have  heard  this  discussion  with  a  calm,  a  dignified,  and  an  imper- 
turbable confidence  in  the  goodness  of  our  cause,  which  reflect  honor 
upon  you,  while  they  have  conciliated  the  esteem  of  your  fellow-citizens, 
and  enhanced  my  affection  for  so  good  a  flock.  You  showed  no  signs  of 
exultation,  held  no  meetings,  forestalled  no  man's  opinion  of  the  parties, 
or  the  questions  at  issue  !  This  was  as  it  ought  to  be.  Continue  this 
virtuous,  this  truly  Christian  line  of  conduct  Jjove  sincerely  and  a^r- 
dially  your  neighbors  of  every  denomination — give  them  good  example. 
Be  faithful  friends,  affectionate  husbands,  fond  fathers,  upright  business 
men — in  a  word,  be  always  good  Catholics.  Praying  that  (iod  may 
pour  down  upon  you  all  his  choicest  blessings,  both  in  this  life  and  that 
which  is  to  come  I  am,  etc., 

Your  devoted  Bishop, 

+  J.  B.  PURCELL. 


(From  the  Catholic  Telegraph.) 

It  appears  that  there  are  a  few  honest  minds  which  have  not  been 
able  to  see  through  the  mydifiadion  craftily  thrown  around  the  Liguori 
affair,  in  the  account  given  of  it  by  the  seven  wise  men  of  New-York. 
The  following  letter,  and  y>articularly  the  short  but  pithy  statement  of 
Mr.  Kinmont,  will  effectually  expose  the  fraud  of  the  fraudulent,  and 
dispel  the  mist  from  the  eyes  of  the  sincere  and  the  unsuspecting.  We 
ask  for  both  an  attentive  perusal. 


APPENDIX.  XXIU 

CiNCiNNATr,  27th  May,  1837. 
To  THE  Editors  op  tub  Catholic  TEiiEGUAPii : 

Gentlemen  : — Allow  me  to  take  this  mode  of  expressing?  my  sense  of 
your  kind  attention  in  j)lacing  in  my  hands  tlie  last  number  of  the 
Millennial  Harbinger,  conducted  by  A.  Campbell.  From  it  I  learn  that 
the  mortified  piide  of  my  late  rival  in  debate  suffers  him  not  to  hold  his 
peace.  I  am  not  surprised  at  it.  To  have  come  off  victorious  from 
eleven  battles,  if  wo  may  rely  on  a  atatenicjnt  which  you  re])ubli!<hed 
from  some  of  your  excliange  papers,  and  been  UMerly  discomfited  in  a 
twelfth  encounter,  is  not  a  light  affliction  ;  it  is  not  one  whicli  a  man  of 
genius  and  sensibility  could  be  expected,  without  a  hard  struggle  and 
considerable  querulousness,  to  endure.  Hence,  in  settling  an  account 
with  poor  human  nature,  knowing,  as  I  do,  the  little  weaknesses  of  which 
it  is  susceptible,  I  would  not  "  tithi  the  mint  and  rue  " — I  would  not 
treat  it  with  too  much  rijror  ;  nor  shall  I  quarrel,  on  any  account,  with 
my  friend,  if  he  seek  relief  from  the  oppressive  sense  of  his  defeat  in 
Bobs,  complaints,  and  tears.  A  fresh  and  dangerous  wound  should  not 
be  too  hixstily  cicatrised.  It  is  better  to  keep  it  open  and  running  for  a 
time  ;  the  cure  will  be  the  more  effectual  in  the  end.  Of  this,  I  have  no 
doubt,  the  gentleman  is  well  aware  ;  and  1  therefore  give  him  credit  for 
tlie  course  which  he  pursues.  For  my  owu  part,  I  was  perfectly  willing 
to  leave  the  result  of  the  controversy  to  the  unbiased  judgment  of  tlie 
jiublic,  and  felt  no  apprehension  as  to  the  nature  of  the  verdict  ;  but  as 
the  gentleman  has  most  unwarrantably  patched  a  pretended  substan- 
tiation of  the  disputed  passage  from  Liguori,  at  the  end  of  the  book,  in 
which,  except  hy  mutiud  consent,  nothing  teas  to  he  published  but  what  had 
been  spoken  in  the  debate,  I  owe  it  alike  to  the  public,  to  the  holy  cause  I 
advocate,  and  to  myself,  still  farther  to  expose  the  disingenuousness 
which  marked  the  conduct  of  my  opponent  from  the  very  commencement 
of  the  debute.  The  seven  pages  called  "  Mr.  Campbell's  Conclusion," 
and  published  in  the  Harbinger,  after  having  be(^n,  far  more  for  Mr.  C.'s 
interest  than  for  mine,  excluded  from  tlie  printed  report  of  the  debate, 
cull  for  a  large  proiwrtion  of  the  censure  which  it  ia  now  my  turn  to 
inflict. 

And  1st.  Of  the  disputed  passage  from  Liguori.  I  must  confess 
that  I  was  exceedingly  shocked  by  the  coarseness  and  indelicacy  of  the 
charge  made,  on  the  ])retended  authority  of  the  saint,  by  Mr.  Campbell, 
in  presence  of  so  promiscuous  an  audience,  and  of  so  many  ladies?.  He 
certainly  must  have  felt  that  his  cause  was  growing  desperate  when  he 
resorted  to  such  an  ungentlemanly  stratagem  to  hide  his  overthrow.  It 
is  painful  for  me  to  proceed  in  the  duty  of  exposing  all  its  foulness  ;  but 
I  must  not  shrink  from  a  task  which  the  gentleman's  ignorance,  whether 
sincere  or  counterfeit,  has  imposed  upon  me.  On  his  own  head  the 
penalty. 

I  beg  the  reader  to  have  the  patience  to  examine  this  matter  thorough- 
ly, and  for  this  purpose  to  refer  to  the  first  introduction  of  the  imputed 
doctrine  of  Liguori,  touching  clerical  concubinage,  as  found  towards  the 
end  of  Mr.  Campbell's  .speech,  p  218  of  the  "Debate."  The  text  and 
the  couiment  there  read  as  follows: 

"  A  bishop,  however  poor  he  may  be,  cannot  appropriate  to  himself 
pecuniary  fines  without  the  licen.se  of  the  apostolical  see.  But  he 
ought  to  apply  them  to  pious  uses,  which  the  Council  of  Trent  has  laid 
upon  nonresident  clergymen,  or  upon  those  clergymen  who  keep  nieces." 
Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444.     (Synopsis,  p.  294.) 

"  Now,  if  a  priest  should  keep  a  niece,  it  is  a  very  expiable  and  trifling 
offence,  but  should  he  marry  a  wife  he  must  be  excimimunicated  for- 
ever !  Thus  the  Roiuan  Catholic  rule  of  faith  treats  the  Bible,  and 
annuls  at  pleasure  every  law  and  institution  of  heaven  !" 

The  keeping  of  a  niece  is  the  horrid  crime  of  incest,  a  species  of  guilt 


XXIV  APPENDIX. 

Btill  more  atrocious  tlian  concubinag-c,  bad  as  that  most  apsuredly  is.  I 
now  ask  the  reader  to  look  smew  at  the  extract  froiu  the  Moral  Tlie- 
ology  of  Liguori,  as  endorsed  by  the  seven  New-York  jmrsons,  or  at  any 
other  produced  by  Mr.  Cami)bell  daring  or  since  tlie  debate,  and  see — 
let,  wlietiier  tliere  is  one  inord  to  make  good  the  infamous  allegation 
that  the  Catholic  Church  allows  priests  (o  keep  nieces,  thai  is  to  commit 
the  enormous  crime  of  Incest,  on  payment  of  u  fine?  I  ask  for  a  "  yes" 
or  "no."  Is  such  a  word  to  be  found  in  any  of  the  Extracts?  And  if 
not,  what  must  he  begin  to  think  of  my  friend's  intentions  in  subsitu  - 
ing  for  one  base  crime  another  far  exceeding  it  in  enormity  and  moral 
turpitude  ? 

2d.  Where,  in  the  Extract  from  Liguori,  is  it  called  "a  very  expinhle 
and  trijling  offence,''  I  will  not  say,  "  to  keep  a  niece,"  but  to  be  guilty  of 
the  sin  of  concubinage  ?  By  a  reference  to  p.  219  of  the  Debate,  it  will  be 
seen  that  I  emphatically  denied  that  a  solitary  passage  could  be  found  in 
any  part  of  the  works  of  Liguori,  of  which  there  were  three  editions  in 
my  possession,  from  which  it  could  be  either  proved  or  fairly  inferred 
that  the  Church  allowed  priests  to  keep  concubines  on  payment  of  a  fine, 
or  that  she  considered  a  single  sin  of  tiiat  nature  as  a  very  exputblo  iind 
trifling  offence?  I  now  repeat  the  declaratiim,  and  ask  again,  where,  in 
the  extract  purporting  to  be  from  Liguori,  does  it  appear  that  tlie  Church 
looks  on  such  a  crime  as  a  trifling,  an  expiable,  or,  under  any  circum- 
stances whatsoever,  an  allowable  offence?  Professor  Biggs  having  seen 
at  a  glance  what  party  was  likely  to  triumph  by  the  translation  of  a  pas- 
sage in  Liguori's  works,  to  which  I  referred  him,  and  apprehensive  of 
that  storm  of  indignation  which,  as  I  shall  presently  show,  burst  from 
Mr.  Campbell  on  the  intrepid  and  the  honest  Kinmont,  prudently  declined 
to  favor  the  audience  with  the  English  version.  None  of  the  other  five 
learned  and  independent  citizens  whom  I  took  the  liberty  of  calling  u])on 
to  decide  the  issue  of  the  fact,  heard  or  cared  to  accept  the  invitation. 
Mr.  Kinmont  being  a  professional  teacher,  favorably  known  to  the  com- 
munity, and,  al)ove  all,  at  least  as  much  opposed  to  Roman  Catholicism 
as  to  Campbellism,  was,  all  things  consiclered,  the  fittest  person  that 
could  be  selected  to  allay  the  intense  anxiety  of  the  audience  by  the  de- 
sired translation.  But  I  prefer  to  narrate  the  circumstances  under  which 
Mr.  K.  nppea^red  on  the  stage,  in  the  words  of  Mr.  Campbell,  as  I 
find  them  in  the  Harbinger  of  the  i)resent  month.  A  more  uncalled  for 
and  wanton  outrage  than  what  Mr.  C.  thus  gratuitously  offers  to 
a  gentleman  who,  to  oblige  the  audience  and  the  parties  interested,  aa- 
Bumed  a  task  which  I  was  far  from  believing  to  be  congenial  to  his  feel- 
ings, has,  perhajis,  never  been  paralleled  in  the  annals  of  literary  or  re- 
ligious controversy.  It  only  evinces  the  uncontrollable  character  of  Mr. 
Campbell's  mind,  tlie  violence  of  his  passions,  and  the  feebleness  of  the 
restraints  which  Religion  and  courtesy  have  been  able  to  impose  upon  a 
man  of  his  pretensions  to  usher  in  the  new  gospel  light  a  Millennium  of 
more  than  human  virtue  on  a  benighted  and  corrupt  world. 

"  The  bishop,  for  effect,  called  first  on  Professor  Biggs  to  examine  nine 
volumes  of  Liiruori  for  the  reference.  The  prolet^sor  seeing  a  clashing 
between  the  ])ages  of  the  edition  of  the  copy  on  the  table  and  that  from 
which  Mr.  Smith  (juoted,  prudently  declined  the  examination.  He 
then  called  upon  Mr.  Kinmont,  of  high  classical  standing,  and  handed  to 
him  the  volumes  in  question.  He  was  to  have  a  day  to  examine  and  re- 
port. In  due  time,  after  an  emphatic  annunciation  or  two,  on  the  part  of 
the  bishop,  Mr.  Kinmont  appears  upon  the  stage.  An  awful  silence 
reigns,  the  Bishop  holds  the  candle  erect  by  the  side  of  the  Roman 
Oracle.  A  breathless  suspense,  as  when  a  judge  is  about  to  pronounce 
sentence  of  death  uj)on  some  unfortunate  criminal,  shows  how  the  ]>nb- 
lic  mind  can  be  wr(>ught  up  to  intense  feeling,  to  a  glowing  heat,  by  a 
single  spark.     What  an  ebullition  1    Mr.  Kinmont  coughs,  throws  hie 


APPENDIX.  XXV 

eloquent  eyes  around  the  crowded  galleries,  and,  before  he  reads  the 
iatal  doom  of  '  Smith,  Slocum  and  Co.,'  and  justifies  the  St.  Lijruori  from 
such  ])rofane  hands,  he,  by  virtue  of  tlie  authority  with  which  he  was  iu- 
VL'sted  by  the  Baron  Swedenborg,  Prince  of  Corresponding  Shadows, 
kindly  says,  '  These  gentlemen  (tlie  bishop  and  myself)  are  fightinj;  about 
shadows.'  ^\^lat  a  consolation  I  And  by  candle-lijjht  tool  How  easy 
then  to  find  tlieiu  !  After  this  free-will  ofEeriug  to  the  illustrious  Baron, 
Mr.  Kinmont  read  as  reported  by  the  bishop." 

To  give  to  this  subject  all  the  counection  and  continuity  to  enable  the 
reader,  having  all  the  facts  of  the  case  spread  out  lucidly  before  him,  to 
come  to  a  correct  conclusion,  I  here  subjoia  the  remarks  of  Mr.  Kin- 
mont. 

"Mu.  Kinmont.  I  am  called  in  my  professional  character  simply,  and 
have  no  part  or  lot  in  this  debate.  (Mr.  K.  is  underst<X)d  to  be  a  Sweden- 
borgian.)  I  sincerely  believe  they  are  disputing  about  shatlovvs,  and  that 
both  ])artie8  are  equally  in  the  wrong  ;  but  I  will  do  what  I  can  to  assist 
in  clearing  up  the  difficulty  of  fact.  I  find  it  stated  in  Samuel  Smith's 
work,  and  marked  as  a  quotation  from  Liguori  uuder  the  article  headed 
'  concubines  of  clergy. '  " 

Mr.  K.  here  read  from  the  Synopsis  as  translated  by  Smith,  and  thus 
continued : 

"  This  is  the  text  and  commentary  as  I  find  it  in  Mr.  Smith's  book. 
This  is  marked  as  Liguori,  p.  444.  If  taken  from  Liguori  at  all,  it  is 
taken  from  a  different  edition.  The  present  purports  to  be  a  complete 
copy  of  the  works  of  Liguori.  It  bears  no  mark  of  being  an  expurgated 
edition.  It  is  said  to  be  an  edition  of  whdt  ic  is  said  and  written  before 
icith  additions.  On  turning  to  the  place  where  he  treats  of  fines  and 
punishments  inflicted  for  concubinage,  he  says  that  ]iriests  guilty  of  this 
offence  were,  after  two  ineffectual  nsprimands,  to  be  degraded  from  their 
functions.  He  refers  to  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  states  what  that  coun- 
cil decreed  ;  Smith  throws  us  on  Liguori,  and  Liguori  on  the  Council  of 
Trent  There  is  nothing  in  Liguori  relating  to  that  subject  but  this. 
The  council  was  called  about  the  year  1542.  This  edition  of  the  decrees 
of  the  council  was  edited  Ijy  t'le  council  itself.  1  have  had  an  abstract 
taken  which  I  will  read.  It  would  take  some  tiine  to  read  the  original, 
and  I  have  a  translation  made  by  one  of  my  scholars.     I  will  read  this. 

"  In  the  records  of  the  decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  Session  2oth, 
chap.  14th,  there  is  described  the  method  of  procei-ding  iu  the  cases  of 
clergy  who  are  guilty  of  concubinage. 

"  After  showing  the  scandal  and  enormity  of  this  sin,  especially  in 
clergy,  whose  integrity  of  life  should  recoinmen.l  and  impress  the  pre- 
cepts of  religion  and  of  the  church,  the  sacred  symxl  forbids  that  any 
individual  holding  the  clerical  office  shall  keep  at  his  house,  or  elsewhere, 
any  mistress  or  unchaste  woman,  or  cohabit  with  any  such,  under  the 
penalty  of  having  enforced  against  him  the  sacred  canons  and  ecclesiasti- 
cal statutes  regarding  that  matter.  It  is,  tlien,  especially  enacted  that 
if,  when  admonished  by  their  superiors,  they  shall  not  desist  from  all 
such  unlawful  and  forbidden  acts,  they  shall  be  deprived  of  the  ihirdpurt 
of  all  their  revenues  and  ecclesiastical  dues  ;  and  if,  still  persevering  in 
their  course,  thev  shall  not  even  heed  a  second  admonition,  they  shall  be 
deprived  of  all  tlieir  ecclesiastical  revenue,  and  suspended  from  the  ad- 
ministration of  ecclesiastical  functions  ;  and  if,  during  this  suspension, 
they  shall  continue  obstinate  and  incorrigible  they  shall  be  declared  alto- 
gether unfit  and  incompetent  to  exercise  any  spiritual  office  whatever  be- 
longing to  the  church  ;  unless  after  a  clear  and  unequivocal  amendment 
of  life,  the  church  slu>uld  think  proper  io  Avithdraw  the  disqualification, 
and  allow  them  to  resume  their  former  station  of  honor  and  trust.  But 
if,  after  the  resumption  of  the  duties  of  their  office,  they  should  resort 
to  those  impure  practices  which  they  had  abandoned,  besides  the  inflic- 


XXVI  APPENDIX. 

tion  of  the  above-named  penalties,  an  act  of  excommunication  with  its 
Bword  of  justice  shall  cut  them  off,  as  dead  branches,  from  the  body  of 
the  faithful  and  church  of  the  living  God.  And  it  is  farther  enacted 
tliat  no  appeal  or  exemption  shall  binder  the  execution  of  any  of  these 
decrees,  but  that  they  shall  be  summarilj"  executed,  at  the  will  of  the 
bishop,  after  he  has  ascertained  the  existence  of  the  enormities.  A  simi- 
lar pmvision  in  its  effect  and  spirit  is  made  with  relation  to  bishops 
themselves,  but  the  order  of  proceeding  is  different. 

"  This  is  in  eub.stance  the  provision  of  the  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  Ses.  25,  chap.  14." 

Is  there  in  this  repcrt  of  the  horror  inspired  and  the  dread  penalties 
dt  creed  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  as  quoted  by  Liguori,  and  translated  by 
Mr.  Kinmont,  aujrht  to  give  as  much  as  a  shadow  of  truth  to  the  allega- 
tion of  Mr.  Campbell,  tk'U  the  Cath-jlic  Church  coiuidera  the  sin  of  con- 
cubinage to  be  a  i:ery  expiable  and  Irifling  offence,  or  alloicaUe  on  'pnyment 
of  n  fine"  f  Is  the  deprivation  of  ecclesiastical  revenues  and  dues;  is 
BupjWHsion  from  ecclesiastical  functions  and  from  the  exercise  of  any 
spiritual  office  whatever  belonging  to  the  church  ;  is  an  act  of  excom- 
munication, with  its  sword  of  justice  cutting  them  off  as  dead  branches 
from  tlio  body  of  the  faithful  and  church  of  the  living  God,  to  be  con- 
sidered as  evidence  that  the  Catholic  Church  regards  concubinage  "  a»  a 
tcry  (xjyiahle  and  triJUng  offence,  or  alloicable  on  payment  of  a  fine"  ?  Can 
any  thing  be  more  opix)sed  to  the  truth,  if  we  accept  the  bad  faith  which 
lias  made  the  assertion?  The  effect  of  the  denouement  acted  like  au 
electric  f^hock  througliout  the  audience.  Mr.  Campbell,  perceiving  how 
strongly  the  tide  of  the  people's  indignation  was  setting  against  him,  en- 
deavored, in  the  midst  of  some  confusion,  which  then,  for  the  first  time 
ensued,  to  obtain  a  hearing.  I  promised  to  allow  him  all  the  extra  time 
which  he  should  require  on  the  following  day,  and  the  meeting  ad- 
journed. 

The  public  are  aware  of  the  steps  which  the  gentleman  has  since  taken 
to  rally  his  routed  forces,  and  apj)ear  once  more  with  a  show  of  strength 
upon  the  field.  These  may  be  reduced  to  two.  First,  the  certificate  pro- 
cured from  the  seven  New- York  parsons.  Secondly,  the  certificate  sub- 
joined from  Mr.  Kinmont.  Let  us  see  whether  either  of  these,  or  both, 
can  iMilster  his  tottering  cause. 

So  nmch  ignorance  and  imbecility  as  are  displayed  in  the  letter  from 
Mr.  Smith  to  Mr.  Emmons,  containing  the  certificate  of  the  par.sous, 
could  scarcely  be  displayed  in  the  same  quantity  of  matter,  on  any  other 
subject.     It  is  ve/'batini  et  lUeratitn  as  follows : 

"The  obnoxious  passages,  then,  which  the  Itvmis-Ji,  Bishop  of  Cin- 
cinnati calls  heaven  and  earth  to  witness  are  not  to  be  found  in  the  works 
of  Liguori,  is  the  following  : 

"  A  Bishop,  however  poor  he  may  be,  cannot  appropriate  to  himself 
pecuniary  fines,  without  the  license  of  the  AiX).stolical  See.  But  he  ought 
to  apply  them  to  pious  uses.  Much  less  can  he  apply  those  fines  to  any 
thing  else  but  pious  uses,  which  the  Council  of  Trent  has  laid  upon  non- 
resident Clergymen,  or  upon  those  Clergymen  ir?co  keep  Concubines." — 
Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444. 

This  passage  I  will  now  give  in  the  Latin,  as  it  stands  on  the  444th 
page  of  the  8th  volume  of  the  "MoiiAL  Theology  of  Alphonscs  de 
LiGi  OHIO,"  from  whose  work  the  extract  was  made.  The  words  are  as 
follows  : 

"  Mulctas  pecuniarias  Episcopus  sibi  addic^re  non  potest,  qnantumvis 
pauper  sit,  sine  licentia  Sedis  ApostoliccT  [ut  ex  pluribus  argumentis  S. 
Congregat,  evincitur  in  Tract  De  Syn.  Dioec.  L.  10  C.  10.  N.  I.J  Sed  de- 
bent  in  usus  pios  expendi.  Multo  Magis  mm  possunt  nisi  in  ])ios  usua 
applicari  ilhw  mulftiB,  <iuas  Tridentinura  inflixit  Clericis  non  residenti- 
bus,  ant  concubinariis. — Ligor.  Epit.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444. 


APPENDIX.  XXVU 

The  words  included  in  the  brackets  were  not  translated  merely  because 
I  did  not  wish  to  encumber  the  "  SYNOPSis"(as  I  have  observed  in  the 
"Preface  of  the  Synopsis  ")  with  too  many  of  the  authorities  (j  noted 
by  Liguori.  I  shall  now,  however,  translate  the  above  words  in  tlie 
brackets,  muc&i  I  know,  to  the  discomfiture  of  his  Reverence  the  Romish 
Bishop  of  Cincinnati.  The  words  in  the  brackets,  therefore,  translated, 
are  as  follows  :  ["as  is  evident  from  many  arguments  of  the  Holy  Con- 
gregation, in  the  Treatise  respecting  tlie  Diocesan  Synods,  Book  10, 
Chapter  10,  Number  2."] 

Here,  we  have  not  only  the  authority  of  St.  Liguori,  but  also  that  of 
the  "  Holy  Congregation  of  RUes." 

Since  the  subject  is  now  to  be  probed  to  the  bottom,  we  will  also 
translate  the  contracted  words  which  I  transferred  into  the  "  8ynop»is," 
as  I  found  them  in  tlie  original.  The  words  to  which  I  allude  are  the 
terminating  ones  of  the  disputed  passage,  as  follows  :  "  Ligor,  Ep.  Doc. 
Mor.  p.  444,"  which,  translated,  stands  thus:  "From  the  work  of 
Liguori,  under  the  head  of  '  An  Epitome  of  the  Moral  Doctrine,'  page 
444." 

In  order  to  render  the  testimony  still  more  striking,  it  is  important  to 
observe  that  this  "  Epitome  of  the  Moral  Doctrine,"  to  which  Liguori  al- 
ludes, is  an  epitome  compiled  by  no  less  a  personage  than  Pope  Benedict 
XIV. ,  as  we  are  informed  by  Liguori  himself,  in  the  301st  page  of  the 
8th  volume  of  his  "  Moral  Tlieology." 

That  the  previous  Latin  words  are  truly  and  faithfully  the  words  of  St. 
Liguori,  and  fairly  extracted  from  8th  volume,  p.  444,  is  duly  certified 
by  the  following  learned  gentlemen. 

"  We,  the  undersigned,  have  carefully  examined  the  foregoing  extracts 
from  the  Moral  Theology  of  St.  Liguori,  and  having  compared  them  with 
the  original  Latin  copy  of  that  work,  now  before  us,  we  do  hereby  certify 
that  the  said  extracts  are  verbatim,  truly  and  correctly  given  by  Mr- 
Smith. 

"  In  this  certificate,  we  include,  particularly,  the  passage  disputed  by 
Bishop  Purcell,  which  is  contained  in  Mr.  Smith's  "Synopsis,"  p.  294, 
par.  7;  headed  "  Concubines  of  the  Clergy.'^ 

"  Duncan  Barr,  Pastor  of  the  MDoiigal  street  Baptist  Church. 
Jno.  Kennaday,  Pastor  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 
Spencer  H.  Cone,  Pastor-  of  the  Oliver  street  Baptist  Church. 
Samuel  F.  B.  Morse,  Prof,  etc.,  in  the  University  of  the  City 

of  New-  York. 
Wm.  Green,  Jr.,  Deacon  in  the  Sixth  Free  Cong.  Church, 

N.  T. 
C.  G.  PiNNEY,  Pastor  of  the  Church  in  the  Broadway  Taber- 
nacle." 

The  first  sentence  of  this  letter  contains  a  nickname  and  a  fault  of 
grammar,  evincing,  from  the  outset,  the  anger  and  perturbation  of  the 
writer's  mind.  But  let  these  small  matters  pass.  I  now  repeat  tlie  ques- 
tion, where  in  these  extracts  is  it  said  that  concubinage  is  a  trifdng 
offence  and  allowable  on  payment  of  a  fine  ?  Read  the  letter  attentively  ; 
examine  it  minutely  ;  is  there  one  word  in  it  that  sanctions  such  an  im- 
putation ?  "  Honor  tliy  father  and  thy  mother,  that  thou  mayest  be 
long-lived  upon  the  land  "  is  a  divine  commandment,  from  which  it  would 
be  just  as  fair  to  conclude  that  we  may  dishonor  fathers  and  mothers  on 
the  condition  of  being  short-lived  in  the  land,  as  to  force  upon  thi^  above 
extracts  a  signification  which  they  were  never  intended  to  convey — to 
which  they  are  diametrically  opposite. 

But  I  have  not  yet  said  what,  to  most  readers,  as  well  as  to  all  who  have 
taken  an  interest  in  this  controversy,  will,  probably,  appear  more  start- 
ling than  all  that  has  preceded  it,  namely,  that  Smith  and  the  seven  New- 
York  parsons  and  Mr.  Campbell  have  either  deceived  or  been  deceived 
themselves,  in  reproseutiug  this  extract  as  taken  from  the  Moral  Theo- 


XXVUl  APPENDIX. 

logy  of  St.  Liguori.  It  is  not  taken  from  it.  Mr.  Smitli  knew  this, 
bat  unwilling  to  expose  either  himself  or  Mr.  Campbell,  and  yet  afraid 
tliat  I  would  expose  both  them  and  their  Rev.  accomplices,  mark  what 
he  does.  He  gets  the  seven  parsons  to  sign  a  certificate  that  the  forego- 
injif  extracts  are  verbatim,  truly  and  correctly  given  by  Mr.  Smith,  from 
the  Moral  Theology  of  Liguori,  and  yet,  in  the  inexplicable  confusion 
of  his  mind,  tells  us,  on  the  self-same  page,  that  "  it  is  important  to  ob- 
t^erve  that  this  '  Epitome  of  the  Moral  Doctrine,' to  which  Liguori  al- 
ludes, was  not  composed  by  Liguori  at  all  i  That  it  was  compiled  by 
Pope  Benedict  XIV.  I  !  and  that  too  we  are  informed,"  says  Mr,  Smith, 
"  by  Liguori  himself  (which  is  utterly  incorrect)  in  the  301st  page  of  the 
8th  volume  of  his  Moral  Theology  !  ! ! " 

Now,  the  E])itome,  or  Synopsis,  was  not  composed  by  Liguori,  nor  yet 
was  it  compiled  by  Benedict  XIV.,  but  from  the  works  of  Benedict 
XIV.,  by  a  personage  different  from  either,  viz.,  Mansi,  Archbishop  of 
Lucca,  as,  not  Liguori,  BUT  the  pbinter,  who  had  this  Synopsis  stitched 
to  the  work  of  Liguori,  to  make  thw  eighth  volume  of  a  uniform  size  with 
the  other  volumes  of  the  series,  informs  us  (Typographus  Lectori)  on 
the  300th  (not  301st)  page  of  the  8th  volume.  Thus  it  is  seen,  1st, 
what  a  dishonorable  farce  has  been  played  off  on  the  parsons  and  all 
concerned  ;  2d,  that  the  extract  is  not  from  Liguori's  Moral  Theology  ; 
3d,  that  such  as  it  now  confessedly  is,  a  fragment  of  a  selection  made  by 
Mansi  from  the  works  of  Benedict  XIV.,  stitched  by  the  printer  at  the 
end  of  the  Moral  Theology,  it  does  not,  either  in  letter  or  in  spirit, 
give  the  slightest  coloring  of  truth  to  the  odious  representation  which 
none  but  a  polluted  mind  could  make,  that  the  Catholic  Church  looks  on 
clerical  concubinage  as  a  very  expiable  and  trifling  offence,  or  ever  did 
permit  it  on  payment  of  a  fine.  No  !  were  the  erring  individuals  as  dear 
to  lier  as  Lucifer,  the  brightest  angel  in  Heaven  before  his  fall .  was  to 
God,  the  Catholic  Church  would  pluck  him  from  the  sanctuary  which  he 
profaned,  and  from  the  administration  of  sacraments  which  he  dared  to 
consecrate  with  sacrilegious  hand,  and  cast  him,  as  Michael  did  the  rel)el 
angel,  "  from  the  body  of  the  faithful,  and  Church  of  the  living  God." 

The  second  certificate  is  that  of  Mr.  Kininont.  The  joy  which  it  gave 
to  Mr.  Campbell  must  have  been  affected  : — it  cannot  last  forever.  \Vhat 
follows  must  quickly  put  an  end  to  it. 

"  Since  the  publication  of  the  debate  on  the  Roman  Catholic  Religion, 
between  A.  Campbell  and  Bishop  Purcell,  many  persons  have  asked  me 
— several  to  make  the  statement  in  writing — whether  the  Latin  passage 
quoted  from  Liguori,  in  the  last  page  in  the  book  (and  a  translation  of 
which  is  given),  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  tacit  permission  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  that  clerg>'men  may  keep  concubines,  on  the  condition  of  paying 
a  stipulated  fine?  Most  unquestionably  it  is  not  so  to  be  regarded  ;  and 
any  person  may  satisfy  himst-lf  on  that  point,  who  will  turn  to  pages 
319-20,  where,  on  being  called  on,  I  gave  an  abstract  of  the  decree  of  the 
Council  here  referred  to  by  Liguori.  If  he  finds  any  thing  in  the  decree 
in  the  shape  of  encouragement  or  connivance,  in  regard  to  the  offence, 
his  mind  must  be  strangely  warped  by  prejudice. 

"  It  might  be  surmised  by  the  insulated  extract,  that  the  Church  drew 
a  revenue  from  the  vices  of  her  priesthood,  and  therefore  winked  at 
them  ;  but  read  the  extract  and  the  decree  together,  and  you  will  be 
convinced  that  the  inference  is  entirely  gratuitous.  There  is  certainly 
nothing  in  the  passage  here  quoted,  or  in  any  one  in  Liguori  (which  I 
could  find),  to  countenance  the  allegation,  that  Priests  may  keep  Concu- 
iiiiesby  paying  a  fine,  wrA^&s  it  be  considered  that  to  punish  an  offence 
is  to  permit  or  encourage  it.  A.  KINMONT. 

"  Cincinnati,  May  22, 1837." 

Grateful,  gentlemen,  for  the  use  of  your  columns,  I  remain,  etc., 

f  JOHN  B.  PURCELL, 
BisTwp  of  Cincinnati. 


TO  THE  PUBLIC. 


The  Publishers  being  well  aware  of  the  importance  of  obtain- 
ing  a  full  and  correct  report  of  this  discussion,  have  spared  no 
pains  nor  expense  to  effect  this  object. 

They  employed  two  gentlemen  well  qualified  as  reporters. 

From  the  joint  notes  of  these,  they  furnished  each  of  the 
parties  with  a  copy  of  his  part  of  the  report  for  revision,  with 
the  express  understanding,  that  nothing  should  be  added  or  sub- 
tracted to  make  their  speeches  different  from  what  they  were 
when  originally  delivered. 

After  being  put  in  type,  a  proof  sheet  of  all  was  sent  to 
each,  for  his  last  corrections. 

Believing,  that  by  this  means,  the  desideratum  sought,  has 
been  obtained,  this  work,  is  now  commended  to  an  enquiring, 
intelligent,  and  reading  community. 

THE  PUBLISHERS. 

Cincinnati,  Fsb.  1837. 


INTRODUCTION 


To  introduce  the  following  report  to  the  reader,  we  lay  be« 
foie  him  the  correspondence  of  the  parties,  which  immediately 
preceded  the  debate. 

LETTER  FROM  MR.  CAMPBELL. 

CiscisinxTi,  Jax.  lltb,  1837. 
Bishop  Purcell — Respected  Sin 

At  two  o'clock  this  morning,  after  a  tedious  and  perilous  journey  of 
ten  days,  I  safely  arrived  in  this  city.  The  river  having  become  innaviga* 
ble  in  consequence  of  the  ice,  I  was  compelled  to  leave  it  and  take  to  the 
woods,  about  two  hundred  miles  above.  By  a  zigzag  course  which  car* 
ried  me  to  Chillicothe  and  Columbus,  sometimes  on  foot,  sometimes  on  a 
sleigh,  and  finally  by  the  mail  stage,  I  accomplished  a  land  tour  of  two 
hundred  and  forty  miles,  equal  to  the  whole  distance  from  Wheeling  to 
Cincinnati. 

After  this  my  travel's  history,  I  proceed  to  state,  that  it  was  with  pleas- 
ure I  received  either  from  you  or  some  of  my  friends,  a  copy  of  the  Daily 
Gazette,  on  the  22d  ult.  intimating  your  fixed  purpose  of  meeting  me  in  a 
public  discussion  of  my  propositions,  or  of  the  points  at  issue  between  Ro- 
man Catholics  and  Protestants.  This,  together  with  your  former  declara- 
tions in  favor  of  full  and  free  discussion,  is  not  only  in  good  keeping  with 
the  spirit  of  the  age,  and  the  genius  of  our  institutions,  but  fully  indicative 
of  a  becoming  confidence  and  sincerity  in  your  own  cause.  Th^  frank  and 
manly  course,  permit  me  to  add,  greatly  heightens  my  esteem  for  you. 

Now,  sir,  that  I  am  on  the  premises,  I  take  the  earliest  opportunity  of 
informing  you  of  my  arrival,  and  of  requesting  you  to  name  the  time  and 
place  in  which  it  may  be  most  convenient  for  you  to  meet  me  for  the  pur- 
pose of  arranging  the  preliminaries.  It  has  occurred  to  me,  that  it  would 
be  useful  and  commendable  to  have  an  authentic  copy  of  our  discussion, 
signed  by  our  own  hands,  and  published  with  our  consent  ••  and  that  is 
might  have  all  the  authority  and  credit  which  we  could  give  tt,  it  would  be 
A  2  V 


VI  INTRODUCTION. 

expedient  to  sell  to  some  of  the  publishers  in  this  city,  the  copyright,  and 
let  them  employ  a  stenographer  or  stenographers  to  report  faithfully  the 
whole  matter. 

It  will  also  secure  for  such  a  work  a  more  extensive  reading,  and  conse- 
quently a  wider  range  of  usefulness,  and  I  have  no  doubt,  be  most  accep- 
table to  our  feelings,  and  every  way  reputable,  to  devote  the  profits,  or  the 
proceeds  of  the  copyright,  to  some  benevolent  institution,  on  which  we 
may  both  agree ;  or  in  case  of  a  difference  on  a  fitting  institution,  that  we 
select  each  an  object  to  which  we  can  most  conscientiously  assign  all  the 
profits  of  such  publication. 

In  order  to  these  ends,  it  will  be  necessary,  that  we  timously  arrange  all 
the  preliminaries,  and  as  many  persons  are  now  in  waiting,  I  trust  it  may 
be  every  way  practicable,  during  the  day,  to  come  to  a  full  understanding 
on  the  whole  premises. 

Very  respectfully, 

Your  ob't.  serv't. 

A.  CAMPBELL. 


BISHOP  PURCELL'S  REPLY. 

ClHCIXHATI,    11th    jANXTAnX,    1837. 

3S:  Alexander  Campbell — My  Bear  Sir  t 

I  sincerely  sympathise  with  you  on  the  tediousness  and  perils  of  yoot 
journey, from  Bethany  to  Cincinnati.  This  is  truly  a  dreadful  time  to 
embark  on  our  river,  or  to  traverse  our  state.  The  sun's  bright  face  I 
have  not  seen  for  several  days  ;  I  hope  when  the  forth-coming  discussion 
is  once  finished,  our  minds,  like  his  orb,  will  be  less  dimmed  by  the  clouds, 
and  radiate  the  light  and  Vital  warmth  without  which  this  world  would  be 
a  desert  waste. 

If  it  meet  your  convenience,  I  shall  be  happy  to  meet  you,  at  any  time 
in  the  morning,  or  in  the  afternoon,  at  the  Athenseum. 

Your  proposition  respecting  the  sale  of  an  authentic  copy  of  the  discus* 
sion  to  a  publisher,  and  the  proceeds,  all  expenses  deducted,  applied  to  the 
benefit  of  some  charitable  institution,  or  institutions,  meets  my  hearty  con- 
currence. 4''i<^  I  propose  that  one  half  the  avails  of  sale  be  given  to  the 
««  Cincinnati  Orphan  Asylum,"  and  the  other  half  to  the  "  St.  Peter's  fe- 
male Orphan  Asylum,"  corner  of  Third  and  Plum  streets,  Cincinnati. 

With  best  wishes  for  your  eternal  welfare,  and  that  of  all  those  who  siih 
ceiely  seek  for  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  I  remain 
Very  respectfully  yours, 

t  JOHN  B.  PURCELL, 

Bishop  of  Cincinnati. 


INTRODUCTION.  VU 

The  parties  met  in  the  Athenaeum  at  2  o'clock,  P.  M.  of  Jan, 
lllh.,  when  after  some  debate  on  the  question,  Who  sliaU  bi 
the  renpondent  ?  they  finally  agreed  to  the  following 

RULES  OF  DISCUSSION. 

1.  We  ag^ee  that  the  copy-right  of  the  discussion  shall  be  sold  to  some 
bookseller,  who  shall  have  it  taken  down  by  a  stenographer,  and  that  all  the 
avails  of  the  copy -right  shall  be  equally  divided  between  two  such  public 
charities  as  Bishop  Purcell  and  Mr,  Campbell  shall  respectively  designate. 

2.  That  the  discussion  shall  take  place  in  the  Sycamore-street  meeting 
house ;  and  it  shall  continue  seven  days,  exclusive  of  Sunday,  commencing 
to-day,  (Friday,  13th)  from  half  past  9  o'clock,  A.  M.  to  half  past  12,  and 
from  3  to  5  P.  M^  each  day. 

3.  Mr.  Campbell  shall  open  the  discussion  each  session,  and  Bishop  Pur- 
cell respond.  During  the  morning  session  the  first  speech  of  each  shall  not 
exceed  an  hour,  nor  the  second  half  an  hour.  In  the  afternoon  each  speaker 
shall  occupy  only  half  an  hour. 

4.  This  discussion  shall  be  under  the  direction  of  a  board  of  five  modera- 
tors; of  whom  each  party  shall  choose  two,  and  these  a  fifth:  any  three  ot 
whom  shall  constitute  a  quorum. 

5.  The  duties  of  the  moderators  shall  be  to  pieiterve  order  in  the  assem- 
bly, and  to  keep  the  parties  to  the  question. 

t  JOHN  B.  PURCELL, 
A.  CAMPBELL. 

In  order  to  meet,  as  far  as  possible,  the  arrangements  entered 
into  for  conducting  the  contemplated  debate  for  seven  days,  Mr. 
Campbell,  according  to  agreement,  sent  to  bishop  Purcell,  on 
Thursday  morning,  Jan.  12,  the  following  statement  of  the 

POLVTS  AT  ISSUE. 

1.  The  Roman  Catholic  Institution,  sometimes  called  the  *Holy,  Apos- 
tolic, Catholic,  Church,'  is  not  now,  nor  was  she  ever,  catholic,  apostolic, 
or  holy  ;  but  is  a  sect  in  the  fair  import  of  that  word,  older  than  any  oilier 
sect  now  existing,  not  the  '  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  Churches,'  but  an 
apostacy  from  the  only  true,  holy,  apostolic,  and  catholic  church  of  Christ." 

2.  Her  notion  of  apostolic  succession  is  without  any  foundation  in  the 
Bible,  in  reason,  or  in  fact ;  an  imposition  of  the  most  injurious  consequences 
built  upon  unscriptural  and  anti-scriptural  traditions,  resting  wholly  upon  the 
opinions  of  interested  and  fallible  men. 

3.  She  is  not  uniform  in  her  faith,  or  united  in  her  members ;  but  mula 
ble  and  fallible,  v  any  oth^  sect  of  philosophy  or  religion — ^.lewish,  Turk- 


Viii  INTRODUCTION. 

ish,  or  Christian — a  confederation  of  sects  with  a  politico-ecclesiastic 
head. 

4.  She  is  the  "Babylon"  of  John,  the  "Man  of  sin  of  Paul,  and  the 
Empire  o£  the  "Youngest  Horn"  of  Daniel's  Sea  Monster. 

a.  Her  notions  of  purgatory,  indulgt-nces,  auricular  confession,  remission 
of  sins,  transubstantiation,  supererogation,  &c.,  essential  elements  of  her  sys- 
tem, are  immoral  in  their  tendency,  and  injurious  to  the  well-being  of  soci- 
ety, religions  and  political. 

6.  Notwithstanding  her  pretensions  to  have  given  us  the  Bible,  and  faith  in 
it,  we  are  perfectly  independent  of  her  for  our  knowledge  of  that  book,  and 
its  evidences  of  a  divine  original. 

7.  The  Roman  Catholic  religion,  if  infallible  and  tinsusceptible  of  reforma- 
tion, as  alleged,  is  essentially  anti-American,  being  opposed  to  the  genius  erf 
all  free  institutions,  and  positively  subversive  of  them,  opposing  the  genervl 
leading  of  the  scriptures,  and  the  diffusion  of  usefiil  knowledge  among 
the  whole  community,  so  essential  to  liberty  and  the  permanency  of  gocd 
govemmenC 

A.  CAMPBEUk 
GiBcisiTATi,  12th  Januaiy,  18S7. 


DEBATE 


ON   THE 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC  RELIGION. 


REPORT. 

The  parties  met  according  to  appointment,  on  the  13th  January,  1837,  at  the 
Sycajuore  Street  Meeting  House,  at  hah'  past  nine  o'clock,  A.  M. 

MODERATORS. 

Messrs.  Samuel  Lewis,  Thomas  J.  Biggs,  William  Disney,  John  Ro- 
OERS  A>D  J.  W.  Piatt. 

WILLIAM  DISNEY  CHAIEMAI«f. 

Mr.  Samuel  Lewis,  having  railed  the  meeting  to  order,  read  the  rules  of  th« 
Debate,  as  agreed  upon  between  the  parties,  and  the  propusitions  advanced  by 
Mr.  Campbell  for  discussion.  He  requested  the  audience  to  refrain  from  any 
audible  signs  of  approbation  or  disapprobation,  as  it  would  interrupt  the  debate. 

Mr.  Campbell  then  opened  the  debate  as  follows : — 

Jlfy  Christian  Friends  and  Fellow-Citizens — 

I  appear  before  you  at  this  time,  by  the  good  providence  of  our 
Heavenly  Father,  in  defence  of  the  truth,  and  in  explanation  of  the 
great  redeemiiig,  regenerating  and  ennobling  principles  of  Protestant- 
ism, as  opposed  to  the  claims  and  pretensions  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
church.  1  come  not  here  to  advocate  the  particular  tenets  of  any 
sect,  but  to  defend  the  great  cardinal  principles  of  Protestantism. 

Considerable  pains  appear  to  have  been  taken  by  the  gentleman 
who  is  my  opponent  on  this  occasion,  to  impress  upon  the  minds  of 
the  public  the  idea  that  he  stands  here  in  the  attitude  of  a  defender 
of  Catholicism,  and  to  represent  me  as  its  assailant.  I  am  sorry  to 
say  that  even  some  Protestants  have  contributed  to  give  that  color  to 
this  debate;  for  I  saw  in  this  morning's  Gazette  an  article,  in  which 
I  am  represented  as  conducting  a  crusade  against  the  Roman  Catho- 
lics. Its  editor  appears  to  have  his  sympathies  morbidly  enlisted  in 
their  cause.  He  is  very  sympathetic  indeed,  in  behalf  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  religion.  Every  agony  the  mother  church  feels  is  a  pang 
to  him ;  for  every  groan  she  heaves  he  has  a  bottle  full  of  tears  ready 
to  be  poured  out.  I  will  not  stop  to  enquire  whether  they  are  politi- 
cal or  religious  tears.  I  have  to  do  with  the  worthy  gentleman  here, 
who  has  represented  me  as  having  volunteered  to  come  forward  with 
an  attack  upon  the  Catholic  chu.ch. 

1  need  Scarcely  inform  that  portion  of  my  audience,  who  were  pre- 
sent at  the  last  meeting  of  the  College  of  Teachers  in  this  city,  that 
B5  far  from  its  being  true  that  I  made  an  attack  in  the  first  instance, 

2  a 


10  DEBATE    ON    THB 

upon  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  the  gentlen»€ui  did  first  assail  the 
Protestants. 

He  says  in  the  Gazette  of  the  19th  of  Dec.  183G,  thatlam  a  bold  and 
wanton  challenger;  but  a  word  of  comment  on  this  document  will 
shew  that  it  is  quite  the  other  way. 

The  issue  was  made  in  the  first  instance  in  the  College  of  Teach- 
ers. You  will  recollect  that  when  Dr.  J.  L.  Wilson  read  an  oration 
on  the  subjejjt  of  universal  education,  the  gentleman  arose,  and  in  that 
Protestant  house,  and  before  a  Protestant  assembly,  directly  and  pos- 
itively protested  against  allowing  the  book  which  Protestants  claim 
lo  contain  their  religion,  to  be  used  in  schools.  He  uttered  a  tirade 
against  the  Protestant  modes  of  teaching,  and  against  the  Protestant 
mfluence  upon  the  community.  This  was  the  origin  of  the  dispute. 
Had  it  not  been  for  the  assertions  made  by  the  gentleman  on  that  oc- 
casion, we  ^ould  not  have  heard  one  word  of  a  discussion. 

It  is  true  that  the  propositions  just  read  may  present  me  in  the  at 
titude  of  what  he  is  pleased  to  call  an  assailant  of  the  Roman  church. 
But  the  question  is — how  has  the  controversy  originated  ?  And  let 
me  ask,  how  is  it  possible  for  the  gentleman  to  prove  that,  because, 
a  year  ago,  I  made  some  answer  to  an  attack  on  Protestantism  from 
the  state  of  Illinois,  and  called  for  some  more  reputable  antagonist, 
that  on  this  account  he  did  not  assail  Protestantism,  and  that  I  am 
the  assailant  in  this  easel  Does  my  having  been  plaintiff  in  that 
case  make  me  necessarily  plaintiflT  in  every  other  case?  Does  my 
having  told  him  that  I  stood  prepared  to  discuss  the  question  at  large 
with  any  creditable  gentleman — [Here  Mr.  C.  was  interrupted  by  the 
moderators  as  not  speaking  to  the  point.]  I  submit  to  the  decision 
of  the  moderators.  I  thought  it  due  to  m)'self,  that  the  public  should 
know  precisely  the  attitude  in  which  the  gentleman  and  myself  stand 
in  this  matter.  I  stand  here  as  the  defender  of  Protestantism,  and 
not  as  the  assailant  of  Catholicism.  I  wished  to  exonerate  myself 
from  such  an  imputation.  But  as  the  gentlemen  have  dwided  that 
we  proceed  at  once  to  the  question,  let  us  begin  and  examine  the  first 
proposition.     It  is  as  follows  : 

"  F*Rop.  I.  The  Roman  Catholic  Institution,  sometimes  called  the  '  Holv, 
Apostolic,  Cattiolic,  Church,'  is  not  now,  nor  was  she  ever,  Ciitliolic,  apostolic,  or 
holv  ;  but  is  a  seel  in  the  fair  import  of  that  word,  older  than  any  other  sect  now 
existing,  not  the  '  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  Churches,'  but  an  a|K)slBCj'  from 
the  only  true,  holy,  apostolic,  and  catholic  church  of  Christ." 

As  this  is  the  place  and  time  for  logic  rather  than  rhetoric,  I  will 
proceed  to  define  the  meaning  of  the  important  terms  contained  in 
this  proposition.  The  subject  is  the  Roman  Catholic  Institution. 
This  institution,  notwithstanding  its  large  pretensions,  1  afl^rm,  can 
be  proved  clearly  to  be  a  sect,  in  the  true  and  proper  import  of  the 
term.  Though  she  call  herself  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches, 
she  is,  strictly  speaking,  a  sect,  and  no  more  than  a  sect.  We  now 
propose  to  adduce  proof  to  sustain  this  part  of  the  proposition. 

In  the  first  place,  the  very  term  Roman  Catholic  indicates  that  she 
IS  a  sect,  and  not  the  ancient,  universal  and  apostolic  church,  the  mo- 
ther and  mistress  of  all  churches.  If  she  be  the  only  universal  or 
Catholic  church,  why  prefix  the  epithet  Roman  T  A  Roman  Catholic 
church  is  a  contradiction.  The  word  Catholic  means  universal — the 
vord  Roman  means  something  local  and  particular.     What  sense  or 


ROMAN    CATHOUC    RELIGION.  11 

ureaning  is  there  in  a  particular  universal  church  !  It  is  awicward  on 
anotlier  account.  If  she  pretends  to  be  considered  the  only  true  and 
universal  church  of  Christ  among  all  nations  and  in  all  times,  why 
call  herself  Roman?  To  say  the  Roman  Catl\olic  church  of  Ameri- 
ca, is  just  as  absurd  as  to  say  the  Philadelphia  church  of  Cincinnati, 
— the  London  church  of  Pittsburgh, — the  church  of  France  of  the 
United  States.  The  very  terms  that  she  chooses  indicates  that  sne 
cannot  be  the  universal  church. 

It  will  not  help  the  difficulty  to  call  her  the  Church  of  Rome.  These 
words  indicate  a  sect  and  only  a  sect,  as  much  as  the  words  Roman 
Catholic.  They  signify  strictly,  only  the  particular  congregations 
meeting  in  that  place. 

The  Roman  Catholic  historians  endeavor  to  reconcile  this  discre- 
{)ancy  of  terms  by  saying  that,  though  those  particular  congregations 
are  meant,  in  their  larger  sense  the  terms  are  used  to  designate  all 
those  congregations,  scattered  throughout  the  world,  who  are  in  com- 
munion with  the  church  of  Rome.     Thus  testifies  Du  Pin — 

"  It  is  truf,  that  at  the  present  time,  the  name  of  the  church  of  Rome,  is  giv- 
ea  to  the  Catholic  church,  and  that  these  two  terms  pass  for  synonymous. 

"Hut  in  antiquity  no  more  was  intended  by  the  nauie  of  the  church  of  Rome, 
tlian  tlie  church  of  the  city  of  Rome,  and  the  popes  (bishops)  in  their  subscrip 
tions  or  superscriptions,  look  simply  to  the  quality  of  bishops  of  Rome.  The 
Greek  schismatics  seem  to  be  the  first  who  gave  the  name  of  the  church  of 
Rome  to  all  the  churches  of  the  west,  whence  the  Latins  made  use  of  this  to  dis- 
tinguish the  churches  which  communicated  with  the  church  of  Rome,  from  the 
Greeks  who  were  separated  from  her  communion.  From  this  came  the  custom 
to  give  the  name  of  the  church  of  Rome  to  the  Catholic  church.  But  the  other 
churches  did  not  from  this  lose  their  name  or  their  author'ty." 

I  shall  hereafter  give  the  day  and  date  of  this  separation,  when  she 
received  this  sectarian  designation  and  became  a  sect,  in  the  proper 
acceptation  of  that  term.  It  may,  perhaps,  appear  that  it  was  not 
only  unscriptural,  but  dishonorable ;  as  opprobrious  as  ever  were  the 
terms  Lutheran  or  Protestant. 

But  suppose  we  call  her  "  Catholic"  alone;  and  her  advocates  now 
endeavor  to  impress  the  idea  that  she  is  no  longer  to  be  called  "  Ro- 
man Catholic,"  but  Catholic,  this  term  equally  proves  her  a  sect;  for 
in  the  New  Testament  and  primitive  antiquity  there  is  no  such  de- 
signation. It  is  simply  the  church  of  Christ.  It  is  one  thing  for  us 
to  choose  a  name  for  ourselves,  and  another  to  have  one  chosen  for  us 
by  our  enemies.  Societies,  like  persons,  are  passive  in  receiving 
their  names.  It  is  with  churches  as  it  is  with  individuals  ;  they  may 
not  wear  the  name  they  prefer.  She  wishes  now  to  be  called  no  lon- 
ger Roman  Catholic,  but  Catholic.  She  repudiates  the  appellation 
of  Roman ;  and  claims  to  be  the  only  Catholic  church  that  ever  was, 
and  is,  and  ever  more  shall  be.  But  we  cannot  allow  her  to  assume 
it;  and  we  dare  not,  in  truth,  bestow  it,  for  she  is  not  catholic.  But, 
as  there  is  no  church  known  in  the  New  Testament  by  that  name, 
could  we  so  designate  her,  still  she  would  be  a  sect. 

But  let  me  ask,  what  is  the  church  of  Ropie  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, or  rather,  what  is  the  present  Roman  Catholic  institution  ? 
Permit  me  here  to  say,  most  emphatically,  that  I  have  not  the  slight- 
est disposition  to  use  terms  of  opprobrium  in  speaking  of  this  church  ; 
or  of  the  worthy  gentleman  who  is  opposed  to  me  in  this  debate.  1 
<io  not  wish  or  intend  to  use  the  slightest  expression  which  could  be 
construed  into  an  unfriendly  tone  of  satire,  irony  or  invective  towards 


12  DEBATE    ON    THE 

the  respectable  gentleman,  or  towards  his  chnrca.  I  shall  speak 
freely  of  her  pretensions  to  be  the  only  tnie  church,  &c.  but  I  shall 
observe  a  scrupulous  respect  in  all  my  language  towards  the  present 
representatives  of  the  Catholic  church  in  the  nineteenth  century. 

Are  we  then  to  understand  her  as  the  immutable,  universal,  ancieni 
priraitiv«,  apostolic  church  of  Christ  1  Are  we  to  understand  this  bj 
the  Roman  Catholic  church  of  the  nineteenth  century,  with  her  popes 
her  cardinals,  her  patriarchs,  primates,  metropolitans,  archbishops, 
archdeacons,  monks,  friars,  nuns,  &c.  &c.  teaching  and  preaching  tho 
use  and  worship  of  images,  relics,  penances,  invocation  of  departed 
men  and  women,  veneration  for  some  being  whom  they  call  "  the  mo. 
ther  of  God,"  teaching  and  preaching  the  doctrine  of  priestly  absolu 
tion,  auricular  confession,  purgatory,  transubstantialion,  extreme  unc 
tion,  &c.  &c.  * 

Is  this  the  ancient,  universal,  holy  apostolic  church  1  Not  one  oi 
these  dogmas  can  be  found  in  the  bible.         ^ 

They  originated  hundreds  of  years  since,  as  I  am  prepared  to  show 
from  the  evidence  of  Roman  Catholic  authors  themselves.  How  then 
can  we  call  it  the  ancient  apostolic  church  1  Not  one  of  these  offices 
nor  dogmas  is  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament.  Hear  Du  Pin  on 
this  point.  In  exposing  the  imposition,  practised,  by  an  effort,  so 
late  as  the  ninth  century,  to  foist  into  the  history  of  the  church  certain 
pretended  decrees  or  writings  of  those  called  the  first  popes,  Du  Pin, 
an  authentic  Roman  Catholic  historian,  proves  these  decrees  and 
writings  to  be  spurious,  because  in  them  there  are  numerous  allusions 
to  offices  and  customs  not  yet  existing  in  the  times  referred  tp. 

"  The  following  proves  theiu  spurious.  1st.  The  second  epistle  of  St.  ClenieDt 
directed  to  St.  James,  speaks  of  the  Ostiarii  or  doorkeepers,  archdeacons  and 
other  ecclesiastical  officers,  that  were  not  then  introduced  into  the  church." 

2nd.  "  This  letter  mentions  *ii6-deacons,  an  order  not  then  established  in  the 
church."     p.  584. 

3d.  "  In  the  first  Epistle  attributed  to  St.  Sixtiis,  he  is  called  an  '  archbishop,' 
a  word  not  used  in  this  time." 

4th.  "  The  second,  attributed  to  the  same  pope,  mentions  consecrated  vessels, 
and  appeals  to  Rome,  the  grandeur  of  the  church.  It  is  there  pretended  that  all 
bi-ihops  wait  for  the  pope's  decision,  and  are  instructed  bj  his  letters  ;  modes 
of  speaking  never  used  hj  the  first  bishops  of  Rome." 

5th.  "  The  epistle  attributed  to  Teletghorus  calls  him  an  archbishop,  a  name 
unknown  in  the  first  ages." 

6th.  "  There  ig  a  decree  in  it,  to  enjoin  three  masses  on  our  Savior's  nativity, 
a  custom  not  so  ancient." 

7th.  "  We  find  several  passages  in  the  letter  attributed  to  Anicetua,  which 
does  not  agree  with  the  time  of  that  pope  ;  as,  for  instance,  what  is  there  laid 
down  concerning  the  ordinations  of  bishops,  sacerdotal  tonsure,  archbishops  and 
primates,  which  were  not  instituted  till  long  after  ;  besides  many  things  of  the 
same  nature."     p.  585. 

How,  then,  can  we  suppose  that  this  church  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, with  so  many  appendages,  is  the  apostolic  church — the  only 
original,  primitive,  universal  institution  of  Christ  1 

But  she  glories  in  the  name  of  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches 
fhroughout  the  world.  This  astonishes  me  still  more  ;  for  with  the 
bible  in  his  hand  and  history  before  him,  who  can  stand  up  and  say, 
that  this  church  ever  was  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches  ! 

The  most  ancient  catholic  church  was  the  Hebrew.  She  was  the 
mother,  though  not  the  mistress  of  all  churches;  for  the  christian 
church  has  no  reigning  queen  on  earth,  to  lord  it  over  her — as  Paul 
says,  on  another  occasion — "  Jerusalem  is  the  mother  of  us  all." 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIOK'>'  J 3 

If  the  gentleman  admit  Luke  to  be  a  faithful  historian,  he  must  not 
only  place  the  Hebrew  church  first,  but  the  Samaritan,  Phenician, 
Syrian  and  Hellenist  churches  as  older  than  the  church  in  Rome.  I 
say  if  we  speak  of  churches,  as  respects  antiquity,  the  Hebrew,  Sa- 
maritan, Syrian  and  Phenician  churches  must  be  regarded  as  prior  to 
her.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  close  with  Paul's  first  appearance  in 
Rome. 

But  that  the  Roman  Catholic  institution  may  stand  before  you  in 
bold  relief  as  a  sectarian  establishment,  I  will  give  you  a  definition 
of  her  pretensions,  from  an  authentic  source,  one  of  her  own  stan- 
dards. The  Douay  catechism,  in  answer  to  the  question — "  What 
are  the  essential  parts  of  the  church  ]"  teaches  "  A  pope,  or  supreme 
head,  bishops,  pastors  and  laity."  p.  20. 

These,  then,  are  the  four  constituent  and  essential  elements  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  church.  The  first  is  the  pope,  or  head.  It  will  be 
confessed  by  all,  that,  of  these,  the  most  essential  is  the  head.  But 
should  we  take  away  any  one  of  these,  she  loses  her  identity,  and 
ceases  to  be  what  she  assumes.  My  first  effort  then  shall  be  to  prove 
that,  for  hundreds  of  years  after  Christ,  she  was  without  such  a  head  ; 
the  most  indispensable  of  these  elements ;  and  consequently,  this  be- 
ing essential  to  her  existence,  she  was  not  from  the  beginning.  Be- 
cause no  body  can  exist  before  its  head.  Now,  if  we  can  find  a  time 
when  there  was  no  pope,  or  supreme  head,  we  find  a  time  when  there 
was  no  Roman  Catholic  party. 

By  referring  to  the  scriptures,  and  to  the  early  ecclesiastical  re- 
cords, we  can  easily  settle  this  point.  Let  us  begin  with  the  New 
Testament,  which  all  agree,  is  the  only  authenticated  standard  of 
faith  and  manners — the  only  inspired  record  of  the  christian  doctrine. 
This  is  a  cardinal  point,  and  I  am  thankful  that  in  this  we  all  agree. 
What  is  not  found  there,  wants  the  evident  sanction  of  inspiration, 
and  can  never  command  the  respect  and  homage  of  those  who  seek 
for  divine  authority  in  faith  and  morality. 

I  affirm  then,  that  not  one  of  the  offices,  I  have  enumerated,  as  be- 
longing to  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  was  known  in  the  days  of 
the  apostles,  or  is  found  in  the  Mew  Testament.  On  the  contrary, 
the  very  notion  of  a  vicar  of  Christ,  of  a  prince  of  the  apostles,  or  of 
a  universal  head,  and  government  in  the  Christian  church  is  repugnant 
to  the  genius  and  spirit  of  the  religion.  We  shall  read  a  few  passa- 
iges  of  scripture,  from  the  Roman  version,  to  p.ove  that  the  very  idea 
of  an  earthly  head  is  unscriptural  and  anti-scriptural.  The  version 
from  which  I  am  about  to  quote  was  printed  in  New  York,  and  is  cer- 
tified to  correspond  exactly,  with  the  Rhemish  original,  by  a  number 
of  gentlemen,  of  the  first  standing  in  society.  If  it  differs  from  any 
other  and  more  authentic  copy,  I  will  not  rely  upon  it.  I  am  willing 
to  take  whatever  bible  the  gentleman  may  propose.  I  read  from  the 
twentieth  of  Matthew.  "  Jesus  said  to  his  disciples.  You  know  that 
the  princes  of  the  Gentiles  overrule  them,  and  those  that  are  the  grea- 
ter exercise  power  against  them.  It  shall  not  be  so  among  you,  but 
whosoever  will  be  the  greater  among  you,  let  him  be  your  minister !" 
Does  this  convey  the  idea  of  a  prince  among  the  apostles,  a  vicar  of 
Christ,  a  lord  over  the  people  of  God  1  Does  it  not  rather  say  there 
shall  not  he  any  hrdship  amongst  you.'  This  command  is  express, 
hat  thf.re  shall  not  be  a  pope,  a  supreme  lord  of  the  christian  church. 
.\g-A-n,  Matt.  23.  8.  •'  Be  not  you  called  Ilabbi,  for  one  is  your  Master 
B 


14  nEBATE    ON    THE 

and  al]  ye  are  brethren :  and  call  none  father  (i.  e.  pope)  for  one  is 
your  father,  be  that  is  in  heaven.  Neither  be  you  called  masters,  for 
one  is  j'our  master,  Christ,  He  that  is  the  greater  of  you  shall  be 
your  servitor !"  If  the  very  question  about  a  pope  had  been  before 
the  Messiah  at  this  time,  he  could  not  have  spoken  more  clearly. 
This  expression  indicates  the  most  perfect  equality  of  rank  among 
the  apostles  and  disciples  of  (^Jhrist,  and  positively  forbids,  in  a  re- 
ligious sense,  the  assumption  of  the  title  o^  father  ox  pope.  The  com- 
mandment which  says  "  thou  shalt  not  steal,"  is  not  more  clearly  laid 
down  than  the  command  "  call  no  man  father." 

Now  will  the  gentleman  deny  that  "  pope"  (in  Greek  "  pappas," 
in  Latia,  "papa")  means  "father?"  and  that  the  case  clearly  comes 
within  the  command.  Jesus  Christ  says,  "call  no  man  pope;"  yet 
they  ordain  a  bishop  and  call  him  pope ;  and  this  pope  claims  the 
title  of  "  universal  father" — supreme  head  and  governor  of  the  church 
of  Christ.     He  is  sometimes  called  Lord  God  the  pope. 

This  testimony  of  Christ  will  outweigh  volumes.  Put  all  the  fo- 
lios and  authorities,  which  the  gentleman  may  bring,  on  one  side,  and 
this  text  of  Jesus  Christ  on  the  other,  and  the  former,  in  comparison, 
will  be  found  light  as  the  chaff  which  is  blown  away  by  a  breath. 

Can  any  one,  then,  who  fears  God  and  believes  in  the  Messiah,  call 
the  pope,  or  any  human  being  "  father"  in  the  sense  here  intended. 
The  Lord  anticipated  the  future  in  all  his  precepts,  and  spoke  with 
an  eye  to  it  as  well  as  to  the  men  of  his  own  time.  He  had  the  pride 
and  assumptions,  of  the  Rabbis  of  Jerusalem,  in  his  eye,  who  cove- 
ted renown,  who  loved  such  greetings  in  the  market  place,  and  re- 
ceived such  compellations  in  the  synagogues.  Describing  these  men 
to  his  disciples,  he  cautions  them  against  their  example,  and  teachea 
them  to  regard  each  other  as  brethren.  I  hope  the  gentleman  will  pay 
particular  attention  to  this  point  in  his  reply  to  these  remarks. 

The  third  testimony  on  which  we  rely  will  be  found  in  Ephesians 
iv.  11.  This  passage  sums  up  all  the  officers  or  gifts  which  Jesus 
gave  the  church  after  his  ascension  into  heaven.  "  And  "  says  Paul 
"  he  gave  some  apostles,  and  some  prophets,  and  some  evangelists, 
and  some  pastors,  and  doctors "  or  teachers.  In  this  enumeration, 
which  contains  the  whole,  there  is  no  pope.  The  highest  or  first  rank 
is  given  to  apostles. 

In  every  other  enumeration  found  in  the  epistles,  there  is  the  same 
clear  reference  to  the  apostles  as  iYteJirst  class.  1  Cor.  xii.  '28.  But 
let  Peter  himself  speak  as  to  his  rank.  We  see  that  in  his  own  1st 
Epietle,  ch.  1,  he  calls  himself  an  apostle,  not  the  apostle  of/ Jesus 
not  the  prince  of  apostles,  not  the  supreme  head  of  the  church.  Pe- 
ter had  no  idea  of  such  headship  and  lordship. 

Again  in  addressing  the  "seniors"  or  elders,  chap.  v.  1.  he  says, 
"  I  myself  am  a  fellow  senior."  They  were  all  co-elders,  co-bishops, 
co-apostles,  as  respected  each  other ;  and  as  respected  all  otlier  offi- 
cers the  apostles  were  first.  The  thought  of  a  supreme  head  amongst 
them  is  not  found  in  the  New  Testament ;  only  as  reprobated  by  our 
Savior. 

I  will  not,  at  present,  advance  any  more  scriptural  authority  upon 
the  point,  but  shall  proceed  to  examine  what  foundation  this  element 
of  the  Roman  church,  has  in  ancient  history.  But  I  would  here  say 
distinctly,  once  for  all,  that  I  will  not  open  a  single  document  to  prove 
any  doctrine,  teuet,  or  principle  of  Protestantism,  other  than  this  holy 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  15 

feco»d  of  the  prophets,  and  apostles,  the  holy  men  of  God,  who  spake 
as  they  were  moved  by  the  Hoi)'  Spirit.  On  these  I  rely,  and  I  af- 
firm that  these  contain  no  authority  for  the  assumption  of  the  doctrine 
of  a  universal  father,  pope,  or  head  of  the  church.  There  was  no 
such  person  mentioned — no  such  idea  cherished  until  hundreds  of 
years  after  the  death  of  the  apostles. 

I  will  read  the  following  general  remarks  by  this  learned  historian 
Tlie  title  page  is  as  follows  : — 

A  New  History  of  Ecclesiastical  Writers,  containing  an  account  of 
the  authors  of  the  several  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments ;  of 
the  lives  and  writings  of  the  primitive  Fathers :  an  abridgment  and 
catalogue  of  their  works  ;  their  various  editions,  and  censures,  deter- 
mining the  genuine  and  spurious.  Together  with  a  judgment  upon 
style  and  doctrine.  Also  a  compendious  history  of  the  Councils;  with 
Chronological  Tables  of  the  whole,  written  in  French  by  Lewis  El- 
lies  Du  Pin,  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne,  and  Regius  Professor  at  Paris. 
3  vols.  Folio.  The  Third  Edition  corrected,  Dublin,  printed  by  and  foi 
George  Grierson,  at  the  Thuo  Bibles  in  Essex  Street,  mdccxxiv. 

I  am  happy  to  find,  appended  to  the  preface,  the  seals  and  signatures 
of  men  high  in  the  church,  which  I  cannot  now  stop  to  read. 

From  this  work  I  will  proceed  to  read  some  passages  in  proot 
of  the  proposition  I  have  advanced,  that  there  is  not  a  vestige  of  evi- 
dence in  favor  of  the  cardinal  idea,  of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion, 
that  there  was  a  pope  in  the  first  ages  of  the  church.  At  the  close  of 
the  third  century  the  highest  advance  yet  made  towards  any  supremacy 
in  the  church  on  the  ground  of  metropolitan  standing,  is  Uius  describ- 
ed by  Du  Pin. 

"  The  bishops  of  great  cities  had  their  prerogatives  in  ordinations,  and  in  coun- 
cils; and  as  in  civil  affairs  men  generally  bad  recourse  to  the  civil  metropolis,  so 
likewise  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  they  consulted  with  the  bishop  of  the  metro- 
politan city.  The  churches  of  the  three  principal  cities  of  the  world  were  looked 
upon  as  chief,  and  their  bishops  attributed  great  prerogatives  to  themselves.  The 
church  of  Rome,  founded  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  was  considered  as  fii^t, 
and  its  bishop  as  first  amongst  all  the  bishops  of  the  world  ;  yet  they  did  not  be- 
lieve him  to  be  infallible:  and  though  they  frequently  consulted  him,  and  hit 
advice  was  of  great  consequence,  yet  they  did  not  receive  it  blind-fold  and  im- 
plicitly, every  bishop  iniaguiiug  himself  to  have  aright  to  judge  in  ecclesiastical 
matters."  p.  590. 

Observe  the  bishops  of  the  principal  cities  attributed  to  themselves 
great  prerogalivesi  And  Rome,  the  chief  city,  began  to  assume  the 
chief  prerogatives.  But  the  general  character  of  the  clergy  as  detail- 
ed by  this  writer  was  not  yet  favorable,  to  such  assumptions — for, 
says  he, 

'*  The  clergy  were  not  distinguished  from  others  by  any  peculiar  habits,  but 
by  the  sanctity  of  their  life  and  manners,  they  were  removed  from  all  kind  of 
avarice,  and  carefully  avoided  every  thing  that  seemed  to  carry  the  appearance 
■if  scandalous,  filthy  lucre.  They  administered  the  sacrament  gratis,  and  believed 
it  to  be  an  abominable  crime  to  give  or  receive  any  thing  for  a  spiritual  blessing. 
Tithes  were  not  then  appropriated  to  them,  but  the  people  maintained  them  vol- 
antarily  at  their  own  expense." 

"The  clergy  were  proiiibited  to  meddle  with  any  civil  and  secular  affairs.  They 
were  ordained  against  their  will  and  did  not  remove  from  one  church  to  another 
out  of  a  principle  of  interest  or  ambition.  They  were  extremely  chaste  and  re- 
gular. It  was  lawful  for  priests  to  keep  the  wives  they  married  before  they  were 
ordainftl." 

Nothing  indeed  like  an  ecclesiastical  establishment  was  yet  in  ex- 
istence :  for  says  Du  Pin,  speaking  of  these  times, 

'After  all,  it  must  be  confessed,  that  the  discipline  of  the  church  has  been  so 


16  DEBATE    ON    THE 

extremely  different  and  so  often  altered,  that  it  is  almost  impossible  to  saj  any 
thins  p  )sitivply  concerning:  it."  p   590. 

So  Stood  the  matter  at  the  close  of  the  third  century. 

But  we  have  still  more  definite  and  positive  testimony,  in  the  great 
councils  of  the  4th  and  5th  centuries.  Let  us  then  examine  the  early 
councils.  The  famous  council  of  Nice  which  sat  in  325,  is  the  first 
general  council  that  ever  assembled  ;  for  although  they  call  the  con- 
sultations of  the  apostles — Acts  15.,  a  council,  yet  in  the  enumeration 
of  general  councils,  of  which  they  establish  eighteen,  that  of  Nice  is 
called  the  first. 

At  this  council  there  were  present  318  bishops.  It  was  called  by 
the  Roman  emperor  in  order  to  settle  certain  discords  in  what  was 
then  called  the  church.  By  the  sixth  canon  of  this  first  council  it  ap- 
pears, according  to  Du  Pin,  that  the  idea  of  a  pope,  or  supreme  head, 
had  not  begun  to  be  entertained.  The  sixth  cancfn  of  the  council  of 
Nice  is  as  lollows. 

♦'  The  6ih  canon  is  famous  for  the  several  questions  it  has  occasioned.  The 
most  natural  sense  that  can  be  given  to  it,  is  this:  '  We  ordain  that  the  ancient 
custom  shall  be  observed,  which  gives  power  to  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  over 
•11  the  provinces  of  Eg-ypt,  Libya,  ana  FantapoUs,  because  the  bishop  of  Rome 
has  the  like  jurisdiction  over  all  the  suburbicarv  regions  (for  this  addition  must 
be  supplied  out  of  Riifinitg;)  we  would  likewise  liave  the  rights  and  privileges  o/ 
the  church  oi  Antioch  and  the  other  churches  preserved ;  but  these  rights  ought 
not  to  prejudice  those  of  the  metropolitans.  It  any  one  is  ordained  without  the 
consent  ot  the  metropolitan,  the  council  declares,  that  he  is  no  bishop:  but  if  any 
one  is  canonically  chosen  oy  the  sutfrage  of  almost  all  the  bishops  of  the  province 
and  if  there  are  but  one  cr  two  of  a  contrary  opinion,  the  suffrages  of  the  fai 
greater  number  ought  to  carry  it  for  the  ordination  of  those  particular  persons 
This  canon  being  thus  explained  has  no  difficulty  in  it.  It  does  not  oppose  th< 
primacy  of  the  church  of  Rome,  but  neither  does  it  establish  it.' 

"  In  this  sense  it  is,  that  it  compares  the  church  of  Rome  to  the  church  of 
Alexandria,  by  considering  tfaem  all  as  patriarchal  churches.  It  continues  also 
to  the  church  of  Antioch  and  all  the  other  great  churches,  whatsoever  rights 
"they  could  have;  but  lest  their  authority  should  be  prejudicial  to  the  ordinary 
metropolitans,  who  were  subject  to  their  jurisdiction,  the  council  confirms  what 
had  been  ordained  in  the  fourth  canon  concerning  the  authority  of  metropo- 
litans in  the  ordination  of  bishops.  This  explication  is  easj' and  natur-al,  and  \\( 
have  given  many  proofs  of  it  in  our  Latin  dissertation  concerning  the  ancien* 
discipline  of  the  cnurch." 

"  This  canon,"  says  Du  Pin,  who  be  it  remembered  was  always 
anxious  to  find  some  authority  for  the  pope's  supremacy,  "  does  not 

ESTABLISH  THE    SUPREMACY  OF    THE  CHURCH  OF    Ro.ME."       Willing    aS 

he  was  to  have  this  primacy  traced  to  the  beginning  of  Christianity, 
he  is  constrained  to  admit,  that  even  the  council  of  Nice  does  not  es- 
tablish it.  Nay  more — it  is  in  truth  against  it ;  for  it  mves  the  Bishop 
of  Alexandria  like  jurisdiction  with  the  church  of  Rome;  and  also 
preserves  to  the  church  of  Antioch  its  metropolitan  dominion. 

It  would  be  too  tedious  to  go  into  an  exposition  of  the  causes,  why 
so  much  power  was  accumulated  in  the  hands  of  four  or  five  bishops 
It  originated  in  the  divisions  of  the  empire.  In  Roman  jurisdiction, 
there  were  four  great  political  dioceses,  (for  diocese  was  then  a  politi- 
cal term)  and  to  these  the  church  conformed.  Hence  the  patriarchal 
sees  of  Rome,  Constantinople,  Antioch,  and  Alexandria.  In  proces? 
of  time,  Jerusalem  was  added,  and  these  all  became  radiating  centres 
of  ecclesiastical  power  ami  patronage.  The  bishop  of  each  dioces* 
assumed  a  sort  of  primacy,  in  his  own  district ;  and  as  various  inter- 
ferences and  rivalries  in  jurisdiction  occurred,  the  council  of  Nice  st 
far  decided  that  the  same  power  should  be  given  to  them  all — that  al 


BOHAK    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  17 

primates  should  be  co-ordinate.  Hence  Du  Pin  could  not  find  in  that 
council  authority  for  the  supreme  primacy  of  Rome.  In  the  canons 
of  the  second  and  third  general  councils  there  is  no  reference  to  these 
matters  whatever. 

I  shall  therefore  proceed  to  the  great  council  of  Chalcedon,  of  pre- 
eminent authority,  the  greatest  of  the  first  fo«r  general  councils. 

From  all  the  canons  of  the  council  relating  to  government,  it  is  evi 
dent  that  they  had  not  yet  excogitated  the  idea  of  a  supreme  head. 
Says  Du  Pin, 

"The  28th  canon  grants  to  the  church  of  the  city  of  Constantinople,  which  la 
called  J\rew  Rome,  ih^  same  privileges  with  old  Rome,  because  this  city  is  the  se- 
cond city  in  the  world.  It  also  adjudges  to  it,  besides  this,  jurisdiction  over  the 
dioceses  of  Pontus,Afia,  and  TV»rac«,  and  over  the  churches  which  are  out  of  the 
bounds  of  the  emperor,  and  aright  to  ordain  metropolitans  in  the  provinces  ot 
these  dioceses."  p.  678. 

Thus  this  council,  composed  of  340  bishops,  and  assembling  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  451,  gave  the  same  power.to  the  patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople as  to  the  patriarch  of  Rome,  and  makes  the  supremacy  of 
the  one  equal  to  the  supremacy  of  the  other. 

I  have  examined  the  proceedings  of  all  the  councils  of  the  first  six 
centuries,  of  which  I  find  about  170,  promulgating  in  all  about  1400 
canons.  J  have  read  and  examined  tiie  twenty  creeds  of  the  fourth 
century  with  all  their  emendations  down  to  the  close  of  the  sixth ; 
and  I  affirm,  without  the  fear  of  contradiction,  that  there  is  not  in  all 
these  a  single  vestige  of  the  existence  of  a  pope  or  universal  head  of 
the  church  down  to  the  time  of  Gregory  the  great,  or  John  the  Faster 
of  Constantinople. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  show  from  the  same  learned  historian  when 
this  idea  began  to  be  divulged.  And  be  it  emphatically  observed  that 
the  title  of  pope  in  its  peculiar  and  exclusive  sense  was  first  assumed 
by  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople,  and  approved  by  the  patriarch  of 
Rome.  Du  Pin  says  in  his  life  of  Gregory,  chap.  1,  "  He  did  of- 
ten rigorously  oppose  the  title  of  universal  patriarch,  which  the  patri- 
archs of  Constantinople  assumed  to  themselves."  Indeed  he  calls 
the  title,  "  proud,  blasphemous,  anti-christian,  diabolical,"  and  says, 
the  bishops  of  Rome  refused  to  take  this  title  upon  them  "  lest  they 
should  seem  to  encroach  upon  the  rights  of  other  bishops."  But  the 
following  document  or  remonstrance  against  the  title  shews  what  a 
novelty  the  idea  of  an  universal  head,  father,  or  pope  was  even  at 
Rome,  A.  D.  588  :— 

"  St.  Gregory  does  not  only  oppose  this  title  in  the  patriarch  of  Constantino^ 
pie,  but  maintams  also,  that  it  cannot  agree  to  any  otner  bishop,  and  that  the 
bishop  of  Rome  neither  ought,  nor  can  assume  it.  John  the  younger,  patriarch 
of  Constantinople,  had  taken  upon  him  this  title  in  a  council  held  in  586,  in  the 
time  of  pope  Pelagius,  which  obliged  this  pope  to  annul  the  Acts  of  this  coun- 
cil.  St.  Gregory  wrote  of  it  also  to  this  patriarch  ;  but  this  made  no  impression 
on  him,  and  John  would  not  abandon  this  fine  title,  B.  4.  Ep.  36.  St.  Gregory 
addressed  himself  to  the  emperor  Ma'jritius,  and  exhorted  him  earnestly  to 
employ  his  authority  for  redressing  this  abuse,  and  force  him  who  assumed  "this 
title  to  quit  it.  He  remonstrates  to  him  in  his  letter,  that  although  Jesus  Christ 
had  committed  to  St.  Peter  the  care  of  all  his  churches,  yet  he  was  not  called 
universal  apostle.  That  the  title  of  universal  bishop  is  against  the  rules  of  the 
gospel,  and  the  appointment  of  the  canons  :  that  there  cannot  be  an  universal 
bishop  but  the  authority  of  all  the  other  will  be  destroyed  or  diminished  ;  that 
if  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  were  universal  bishop,  and  it  should  happen  that 
iie  should  fall  into  heresy,  it  might  be  said  that  the  universal  church  was  fallen 
into  l°,structiou.  That  the  council  of  Chalcedon  had  offered  this  title  to  /.^o, 
B2  2 


18  DEBATS   ON   THE 

but  n(:ither  tic  nor  his  suctessors  would  accept  it,  lest  by  giviii»  something  pe. 
culiar  to  one  bishop  only,  they  should  take  away  the  rights  which  belong  to  all 
the  bishops. — That  it  belongs  to  the  emperor  to  reduce  by  his  authority  him 
who  despises  the  canons,  and  does  injury  to  the  univei-sal  church  by  assuming 
this  singular  name."     B.  4.  Ep.  32. 

But  at  this  time  the  patriarchs  of  Constantinople  and  Rome  were 
contending  for  the  supremacy,  and  while  it  appeared  to  Gregory  thai 
his  rival  of  the  east  was  likely  to  possess  the  title,  he  saw  in  it,  eve» 
ry  thing  anti-christian  and  profane.  When  a  new  dynasty,  however, 
amended  the  throne  and  offered  the  title  to  a  Roman  bishop,  it  lost  all 
i'6  blasphemy  and  impiet}',and  we  find  the  successor  of  Gregory  can 
vear  the  title  of  universal  patriarch  when  tendered  him  by  Phocas, 
w'ithout  the  least  scrupulosity. 

It  is  then  a  fact  worthy  of  much  consideration  in  this  discussion, 
that  John  bishop  of  Constantinople  first  assumed  the  title  of  univer- 
sal head  of  the  whole  christian  church,  and  that  the  bishop  of  Rome 
did  in  that  case  oppose  it  as  anti-scriptural  and  anti-christian.  * 

Concerning  the  reputation  of  Saint  Gregory  I  need  not  be  profuse 
Of  the  Gregories  he  is  deservedly  called  the  Great.  Renowned  in 
history  as  one  who  stamped  his  own  image  on  the  Roman  world  foi 
a  period  of  five  hundred  years,  yet  he  could  not  brook  the  idea  of  a 
pope,  especially  when  about  to  be  bestowed  on  his  rival  ^  Constan 
tinople. 

St.  Gregory,  be  it  remembered,  says  Du  Pin,  did  not  onl)^  oppose 
the  title  in  the  case  of  John  the  Faster,  as  proud,  heretical,  blasphe- 
mous, &c.  but  could  not  agree  to  its  being  assumed  by  any  other 
bishop ;  he  affirmed  that  the  bishops  of  Rome  ought  not,  dare  not, 
cannot  assume  this  pompous  and  arrogant  title. 

Thus  stood  matters  as  respects  a  supreme  head  up  to  within  14 
years  of  the  close  of  the  6th  century. — [Time  expired.] 

Eleven  o'clock  Ji.  M. 
Bishop  Purceix  rises — 

I  thought  it  likely,  my  respected  and  belced  fellow  citizens,  that  I 
should  have  to  day  a  ditficult  task  before  mo-  But"I  perceive  that  I 
shall  have  an  easy  one.  I  expected  from  the  reputation  of  my  antag- 
onist as  a  debater,  that  he  was  going  to  argue  so  closely,  and  to  press 
me  so  hard,  that  he  would,  to  use  a  common  exp>-ession,  make  minced 
meat  of  me,  and  not  leave  one  bone  of  me  unbroken.  I  thought  that 
my  creed,  so  ancient,  so  venerable,  so  holy,  was  to  be  torn  into  tat- 
ters and  scattered  to  the  four  winds  of  heaven — I  was  mistaken  ! 

The  gentleman  occupied  ten  minutes  of  his  time  in  endeavoring  to 
bias  the  judgment  of  his  hearers  in  favor  of  the  idea,  that  this  contro- 
versy originated  not  with  himself,  but  that  I  was  the  aggressor,  in 
doing  which  h*>  was  called  to  order.  I  will  not  trespass  more  than 
two  or  three  minutes  on  your  patience  in  answering  his  preliminary 
observations. 

I  am  willing  to  let  that  matter  rest  on  its  own  merits.  As  to  the 
question  of  assailant  and  defender  in  this  controversy,  the  public  have 
the  data,  and  it  is  for  them  to  judge.  My  worthy  opponent  began  the 
pr«  sei>t  debate  by  representing  himself  as  the  staunch  defender  c*"  Pro- 
testantism, endeavoring  thereby^  to  enlist  the  sympathies  of  Protectants 
in  his  favor.  And  what,  I  would  presume  to  inquire,  are  Ms  princi- 
ples "?  What  are  his  claims,  his  pretensions,  or  his  n^H  to  a^-ttear 
before  this  assembly  as  the  defender  of  Protestantism  \     ^^  t  u     "ill 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  19 

aware  what  sad  pranks  have  been  lately  played  off  before  high  Hea- 
ven by  men  styling  themselves  Protestants,  which  all  classes  of  Pro- 
testants unite  in  deprecating,  which  they  all  condemn.  I  know  not 
whether  there  be  not  some  Protestants  here,  who  will  not  admit  his 
gratuitous  advocacy  of  their  principles — who  will  not  believe  that  the 

f)rinciples  of  Protestantism  which  he  volunteers  to  defend  will  be  ful- 
y  or  fairly  represented  by  him.  For  one,  I  think  the  Episcopalians, 
a  numerous  and  respectable  class,  will  not  consent  to  be  represented 
by  him ;  for  he  denies,  if  I  am  rightly  informed,  that  there  is  proper- 
ly any  ministry  in  the  Protestant  church  so  called — tliat  a  divine  call 
should  precede  the  assumption  of  the  sacred  office.  [Here  the  mod- 
erators interrup'ted,  by  requesting  the  speaker  to  confine  himself  to  the 
question.] 

Well  we  are  so  far  even,  [a  laugh.]  The  gentleman,  then,  began 
by.^he  assertion  that  the  term  Roman  Catholic  was  an  incongruity.^ 
But  I  deny  it  to  be  an  incongruity.  Terms,  we  all  know,  are  used 
the  mo'e  clearly  to  designate  the  idea  or  object  which  they  represent. 
"  Catholic"  is  the  name  of  our  church ;  and  we  only  prefix  the  word 
Roman  to  signify  that  she  is  in  communion  with  the  see  of  Rome. 
We  acknowledge  there  a  primate  of  superior,  ecclesiastical  jurisdic- 
tion, and  in  his  communion  we  do  abide. 

He  says  the  word  Roman  is  incongruous ;  yet  his  own  authority, 
Du  Pin,  says  it  "was  synonymous  with  Catholic.  It  was  so  under- 
stood formerly.  And  here  I  may  observe  that  I  deny  the  authority 
of  Du  Pin  to  be  competent  to  the  settlement  of  questions  to  be  called 
up  for  decision  in  the  course  of  the  present  controversy.  Du  Pin  was 
a  Jansenist,  removed  from  his  place  of  Regius  Professor  at  the  Sor- 
bonne  for  his  doctrinal  errors,  by  Louis  XIV.  to  whom  Clement  XI 
addressed  a  brief  on  this  occasion,  commending  his  zeal  for  the 
truth.  The  claim  of  Rome  was  undisputed  in  the  early  ages,  and  it 
was  only  when  her  preeminence  was  contested  that  the  term  "  Roman" 
was  used  before  the  word  Catholic.  Hence  it  was  no  incongruity, 
but  a  clearer  designation  of  the  see  in  whose  communion  were  all  the 
churches.  He  has  stated  an  inaccuracy  in  saying  that  the  word  cath- 
olic was  not  found  in  the  bible.  Is  not  the  episUe  of  St.  James  cal- 
led catholic  1  And  will  he  presume  to  say  the  word  was  not  placed 
there  in  the  very  first  age  of  Christianity  1 

The  gentleman  says  he  will  use  no  words  that  may  convey  an  op- 

frobrious  meaning.  God  forbid  that  I  should  set  him  the  example, 
shall  debate  this  question  with  earnestness,  but  not  with  passion. 
As  soon  as  the  discussion  closes,  I  can  meet  the  gentleman  without  a 
single  unkind  or  unfriendly  feeling. 

But  in  enumerating  various  doctrines  of  the  Catholic  church,  I  was 
shocked  to  hear  him  use  the  language  "  some  being  called  the  mother 
of  God."  Great  God  !  didst  thou  not  send  into  the  world  thy  Son, 
Jesus  Christ,  to  save  perishing  man,  and  didst  thou  not  select  one 
of  all  the  daughters  of  Eve,to  be  the  mother  of  that  child  of  benedic- 
tion, and  was  not  Mary  this  holy  one,  to  whose  care  was  committed 
his  infancy,  and  to  whom  he  was  subject  1  Was  she  not  the  chosen 
one  of  heaven,  to  whom  its  archangel  was  sent  with  the  communica- 
tion— "  Hail,  full  of  Grace,"  or  as  it  is  in  the  Protestant  version^ 
"  thou  that  art  highly  favored — the  Lord  is  with  thee,"  and  do  we 
now  hear  her  stigmatized  in  such  language,  and  designated  as  "  soma 
being  called  the  mother  of  God  1" 


20  DEBATE    ON    THE 

The  gentleman  then  contests  the  doctrine  of  a  hierarchy  in  the 
church ;  and  says  what  he  asserts  is  proved  by  the  scriptures.  1 
would  ask — has  he  read  the  bible  1  Has  he  read  the  book  of  Leviti- 
cus ?  Does  he  not  find  there  the  example  set  of  a  distinction  of  orders 
in  religious  affairs?  Did  not  the  Lord  speak  to  Moses,  saying, — i 
♦' '  Take  Aaron  with  his  sons,  their  vestments  and  the  oil  of  unction,' 
and  he  poured  it  on  Aaron's  head — he  put  also  the  mitre  on  his  head. 
Xnd  after  he  had  offered  his  sous,  he  vested  them  with  linen  tunics 
and  girded  them  with  girdles,"  &c.  &c.  "  And  Nadab  and  Abiu 
were  consumed  with  fire  for  opposing  them,  and  they  died  before  the 
Lord."  Did  not  Moses  lead  ?  Did  not  Aaron  assist  1  Were  there 
not  councillors  appointed  by  the  Lord,  to  divide  the  burden  of  their 
ministry  1  Did  not  king  Josaphat  send  Zachariah  and  Nathaniel  and 
Michael,  and  with  them  the  Levites,  Senneias,  &c.,  to  teach  the  peo- 
ple 1  Paralip.  17.  7.  What  is  this  but  a  distinction  of  orders  and  of 
authority  in  the  Jewish  dispensation  t 

He  says  there  was  no  distinction  of  orders  in  the  early  christian 
church  ;  and  he  refuted  himself  by  appealing  for  a  solution  of  the  dif- 
ficulty to  St.  Paul.  Were  there  no  ordera,  no  hierarchy  1  What  says 
St.  Paul  in  4th  Ephesians?  "  And  he  gave  some  apostles,  and  somt 
prophets,  and  other  some  evangelists,  and  other  some  pastors,  and 
teachers,  for  ttie  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the  ministry, 
for  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ ;  until  we  all  meet  unto  the 
unity  of  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect 
man,  unto  the  meeisure  of  the  age  of  the  fullness  of  Christ."  We 
must  here  remark  a  gradation  of  authority  in  the  church  of  God.  Foi 
whaf?  For  the  work  of  the  ministry.  There  never  has  existed  a  so- 
cial body  without  subordination,  or  distinction  of  -ank.  The  church 
of  Christ  is  a  social  body.  It  needs  to  be  subjected  to  order,  even 
more  than  a  political  body ;  and  as  if  St.  Paul  anticipated  the  objec- 
tion, which  we  have,  not  without  surprise,  heard  this  day  urged,  he 
expressly  states  the  object  of  the  institution  of  a  hierarchy  by  him, 
who  ascending  on  high  gave  gifts  to  men,  to  be  the  perfecting  of  the 
saints — the  unity  of  faith.  "  Are  all,"  he  asks,  (what  my  friend 
would  make  them)  "  prophets  !  Are  all  pastors  ]" — He  elsewhere 
asks,  "  How  can  they  preach  unless  they  be  sent  T"  By  whom  ?  By 
an  ecclesiastical  superior. — So  much  for  the  evidence  of  the  Old  Tes 
tament,  and  the  New  Testament.  They  both  teach  a  head,  a  hierar- 
chy and  subordination  among  the  people  of  God. 

This  takes  me  to  the  examination  of  the  title,  assumed  by  the  Cath- 
olic church,  of  mother  and  mistress  of  all  the  churches.  He  says 
Jerusalem  was  the  mother  church  at  first — and  then  the  Samaritan, 
and  so  on,  I  need  not  follow  him.  I  will  explain  what  we  mean  by 
the  terra. — We  call  her  mother  because  she  guides,  she  cherishes  us. 
We  call  her  mother,  because  we  feel  a  filial  reverence  for  her — just 
as  an  orphan  calls  her  who  protects  her,  educates  her,  and  guides  her 
wandering  feet,  by  the  same  tender  appellative.  There  is  no  blasphe- 
my in  this  comparison.  It  is  the  Son  of  God  that  established  the 
authority  of  that  church.     The  name  is  its  designation. 

But  the  word  '  mistress'  is  never  used  in  speaking  of  the  church, 
in  the  sense  of  lordship,  or  queenship.  It  is  the  way  in  which  chil- 
dren address  their  teacher.  They  frequently  use  the  expression,  as 
we  read  in  Corderj^'s  Colloquies,  "salve  magister."  Magistra  hereia 
addressed  to  her  in  her  capacity  of  teacher,  and  such  she  is,  and,  as  I 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  21 

shall  prove,  by  the  appointment  and  the  express  institution  of  Jesus 
Christ.  ^ 

He  next  referred  to  the  Doway  catechism  to  show  from  the  defini- 
tion of  the  Catholic  church,  that  she  consisted  of  four  elements,  viz. 
the  pope,  bishops,  pastors,  and  laity. 

Now  the  catechism  of  this  diocese  defines  the  Catholic  church  to 
be  the  congregation  of  all  the  faithful,  professing  the  same  faith,  re- 
ceiving the  same  sacraments,  and  united  under  one.  visible  head,  the 
pope,  or  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  on  earth. 

•  It  is  defined  to  be  the  congregation  of  all  the  faithful.  This  is  the 
definition  which  most  authors  give.  It  is  that  of  the  catechism  from 
whicli  my  friend  has  quoted. 

But  let  us  adopt  his  definition,  and  I  am  prepared  to  show  that  the 
idea  of  a  supreme  head  has  its  origin  in  the  bible,  and  is  supported 
by  the  earliest  ecclesiastical  authority.  I  must  here  take  notice  of  the 
promise  he  gave  to  put  his  finger  on  the  precise  day  and  date  wheu 
the  church  called  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  ceased  to  be  the  cTiurch 
of  Christ.  He  has  left  us  as  much  in  the  dark  as  ever  on  this  most 
important  of  all  events.  It  is  a  point  which  has  puzzled  the  world, 
and  will  for  ever  puzzle  it,  to  fix  that  date.  It  will,  I  am  sure,  puz- 
zle my  friend.  The  whole  world  has  never  been  able  to  state  at  what 
particular  moment  the  Catholic  church  lost  her  prerogative  and  the 
favor  of  God — when  she  ceased  to  be  in  the  true  sense  the  Catholic 
Church.  The  reason  of  this  is  obvious.  She  has  never  forfeited  her 
prerogative.  But  to  the  matter  before  us.  It  is  opposed  to  scripture 
to  assert  that  the  church  in  apostolic  days  had  no  head.  What  did 
Christ  say  to  Peter  when  he  addressed  him  the  mysterious  question — 
"  Lovest  thou  me  more  than  these"?  Peter  says  he  does  love  him. 
Jesus  gives  him  the  order,  "  feed  my  lambs."  A  second  time  he  asks 
the  question,  and  receives  the  same  reply.  The  third  time  he  repeats 
the  same  question.  Peter,  troubled  that  his  Lord  should  doubt  his 
affection,  replies,  "  Oh  Lord,  thou  knowest  all  things — thou  knowest 
that  I  love  thee,"  and  Jesus  repeated  the  command — "  feed  my  lambs" 
— "  feed  my  sheep." 

Thus  Christ  establishes  the  headship  of  the  church  in  Peter,  and 
him  he  makes  his  vice-gerent,  or  common  pastor,  to  feed  both  Iambs 
and  sheep — both  clergy  and  laity. 

Mr.  Campbell  quarrels  with  the  doctrine  of  the  pope's  headship 
because  it  carries  a  power  and  an  authority  with  it :  and  he  quotes  the 
New  Testament  to  prove  no  such  power  to  have  been  exercised  in  the 
days  oY  the  apostles.  I  have  disproved  his  argument  upon  this  point 
already.  Christ  did  institute  a  body  of  leaders,  a  ministry  to  guide 
his  people,  "  that  henceforth  we  be  no  more  children  tossed  to  and  fro, 
and  carried  about  by  every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the  wickedness  of 
men.  by  cunning  craftiness,  by  which  they  lie  in  wait  to  deceive. 
But  doing  the  truth  in  Christ,  we  may  in  all  things  grow  up  in  him 
who  is  head,  even  Christ;  from  whom  the  whole  body  being  compac* 
ted  and  fitly  joined  together,  by  what  every  part  supplieth,  according 
to  the  operation  in  the  measure  of  every  part,  maketh  increase  of  the 
body,  unto  the  edifying  of  itself  in  charity."  Must  not  the  body 
have  a  head,  the  house  a  foundation ?  He  objects  that  we  call  the 
sovereign  pontiff — Pope,  or  father,  whereas  Christ  says,  "call  not  any 
man  Father."  But  is  this  prohibition  of  our  Savior  to  be  taken  licer- 
allj  1     Is  there  any  guilt  or  imoiety  in  calling  a  parent  "  Father]'* 


22  DEBATE    ON   THE 

Many  of  Christ's  commands  are  similar.  He  commands  us  to  call 
no  man  good.-  for  God  only  is  good.  But  do  we  not,  in  saluting  a 
friend  in  common  life,  say  "  Good  Sir,"  "  my  good  friend?"  &c.  Is 
there  any  impiety  in  this  1  li  is  the  using  these  terms  in  that  sense 
in  which  they  are  peculiar  to  the  divinity,  which  Christ  forbids.  And 
the  pope  when  he  corresponds  with  the  bishops,  does  not  assume 
these  proud  titles,  but  addresses  them  as  an  elder  Brother.  We  do 
not  call  him  "  Lord  God  the  Pope." 

Mr.  C.  says,  St.  Paul  did  not  lord  it  over  the  clergy.  Neithei 
does  the  pope.  He  is  to  govern  the  church  according  to  the  canons. 
He  can  make  no  articles  of  faith.  He  cannot,  he  does  not  act  arbi- 
trarily in  proposing  articles  of  belief  unknown  to  Catholic  antiquity. 
But  neither  will  he  suffer  innovation.  His  language  is  like  St.  Paul's, 
"  Were  I  or  an  angel  from  Heaven  to  preach  to  you  any  other  gospel, 
than  what  has  been  preached,  let  him  be  Anathema  !"  This  expres- 
sed the  sense  the  great  apostle  entertained  of  his  own  responsibility, 
and  the  danger  of  novelty  in  religion.  He  would  not  suffer  altar  to 
be  raised  against  altar,  on  the  ground  of  private  interpretation  of  the 
bible.  He  would  not  suffer  the  wolves  of  heresy  and  error  to  prowl 
around  the  fold,  and  tear,  and  scatter  the  sheep  entrusted  to  him  by 
Jesus  Christ. 

It  Avould  be  horrid  blasphemy  to  apply  to  man  the  title  Father,  in 
the  sense  in  which  it  is  addressed  to  God.  We  never  call  the  pope 
in  any  sense  God.  When  the  pope  writes  to  the  bishops,  he  begins 
by  "  Dikcti  Fratres'''  "  Beloved  Brethren," — a  republican,  and  if 
you  please  democratic  address.  The  bishops  are  all  brethren  undei 
one  common  father.  The  pope  is  accused  of  letting  himself  be  wor- 
shipped. This  is  not  so.  But  when  the  Pope  comes  before  the  altai 
he  bows  down  like  the  humblest  of  his  people.  "  I  confess,"  saya 
he,  "to  Almighty  God,  to  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary,  the  holy^  Apostles, 
and  to  all  the  Saints,"  the  least  of  whom  he  therefore  acknowledges 
to  be  greater  than  himself,  "  that  I  have  sinned ;"  and  this  is  what  is 
called  settiri^  himself  up  to  be  a  God  !  See  how  you  have  been  de- 
ceived by  the  invidious  representations  you  have  had  of  the  pope,  and 
of  our  doctrine,  my  friends. 

I  assert  again  that  the  authority  quoted  by  my  friend,  Mr.  C,  viz. 
Du  Pin,  is  no  authority.  He  was  the  rank  enemy  of  the  Roman  see, 
a  Jansenist,  reproved  and  censured  by  the  Catholic  church,  Mr.  C. 
knows  this,  for  I  have  read  to  him  the  documents  that  prove  it,  and 
he  was  confounded  by  them.  It  is  neither  good  faith,  nor  good  logic, 
to  quote  him  as  an  authority  against  my  argument.  As  for  the  signa- 
tures appended  to  the  English  translation,  I  care  not  for  them  ;  they 
may  have  been  wrongfully  placed  there,  or  those  certificates  suborn- 
ed. This  makes  nothing  for  the  authority  of  the  book,  and  no  argu- 
ment can  be  drawn  from  them.  But,  m}'  friends,  I  am  sure  you  dis- 
covered his  <liscomfiture  when  he  appealed  to  Du  Pin.  There  was  a 
stumbling  block  in  his  way,  something  he  could  not  get  over.  Did 
you  not  notice  how  with  the  rapid  speed  of  a  rail-road  car  dashing 
suddenly  on  an  obstruction,  he  fied  the  track,  when  he  found  to  his  as- 
tonishment that  the  testimony  adduced  by  his  author,  was  not  unfa- 
vorable to  the  supremacy  of  St.  Peter,  and  his  successors !  I  will 
examine  his  writings  to  show  that  even  in  the  third  century,  the  bish- 
ops of  Rome  claimed  this  prerogative,  and  Du  Pin  tells  you  that  this 
was  acknowledged.      He  says  there  were  three  principal  bishops. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGIOX.  23 

This  is  a  great  admission,  and  I  am  thankful  for  it.  He  says  that 
event-then,  bishops  came  from  inferior  sees,  and  laid  their  conflicting 
claims  before  the  see  of  Rome ;  and  submitted  to  the  chair  of  Peter, 
doubts  in  religious  matters ;  and  urged  it  to  proclaim  a  solution  of 
their  difficulties ;  but  he  says,  they  did  not  believe  the  pope  of  Rome 
infallible.  This  is  granting  to  the  Catholics  the  whole  mooted  ques- 
tion. The  question  is  clearly  settled  by  this  admission.  Appeals 
were  lodged  before  the  bishop  of  Rome,  though  he  was  not  believed 
to  be  infallible.  Neither  is  he  now.  No  enlightened  Catholic  holds 
the  pope's  infallibility  to  be  an  article  of  faith.  I  do  not;  and  none 
of  my  brethren,  that  I  know  of,  do.  The  Catholic  believes  the  pope, 
as  a  man,  to  be  as  liable  to  error,  as  almost  any  other  man  in  the  uni- 
verse. Man  is  man,  and  no  man  is  infallible,  either  in  doctrine  or 
morals.  Many  of  the  popes  have  sinned,  and  some  of  them  have 
been  bad  men.  I  presume  my  worthy  antagonist  will  take  his  brush 
in  hand,  and  roll  up  his  sleeves,  and  lay  it  on  thera  hard  and  heavy ; 
so  will  I ;  and  whenever  he  uses  a  strong  epithet  against  them,  I  will 
use  a  stronger.  But  let  us  return  to  the  gentleman's  authority,  Du 
Pin.  We  come  to  the  council  of  Nice,  which  was  held  A.  D.  325, 
and  where  318  bishops  were  assembled.  This  council  was  convoked 
oy  the  first  christian  emperor  Constantino  the  Great,  at  the  suggestion, 
I  might  have  more  correctly  said  the  instigation  of  Sylvester,  bishop 
of  Rome,  and  of  course,  with  his  consent.  Osius,  bishop  of  Cordo- 
va, and  two  legates,  Vitus  and  Vincentius,  presided  in  it,  in  the  name 
of  the  Roman  pontiff.  The  principal  doctrine  on  which  the  council 
was  assembled  to  decide,  was  the  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ  denied  by 
the  Arians.  From  the  manner  of  the  convocation  of  the  council,  the 
circumstance  of  its  having  been  presided  over  by  the  representatives 
of  the  pope,  or  bishop  of  Rome,  the  submission  of  the  entire  chris- 
tian world  to  its  decrees,  and  the  authentic  records  of  its  transactions 
which  have  reached  us,  we  have  the  most  convincing  evidences  of  the 
reverence  which  was  even  then  entertained  for  the  successor  of  St. 
Peter ;  and  the  best  practical  illustration  of  the  wisdom  that  estab- 
lished his  pre-eminence  of  rank  among  his  brethren,  to  watch  over 
the  purity  of  doctrine,  the  soundness  of  morals,  the  uniformity  of 
discipline,  and  the  maintenance  of  union  among  the  churches.  What 
more  direct  and  satisfactory  testimony  could  we  require  of  the  supre- 
macy of  the  see  of  Rome,  than  the  distinct  recognition  of  its  authori- 
ty by  so  venerable  an  assertibly  1  And  what  if  rival  claims  were  ad- 
vanced by  other  sees'?  This  ambitious  spirit  is  as  old  as  Christiani- 
ty, as  ancient  as  the  origin  of  the  human  race.  The  apostles,  them- 
selves, strove  for  the  mastery.  They  contended  which  of  them  was 
the  greater.  But  this  rivalry  only  served,  in  the  end,  to  establish 
more  firmly  the  precedency  of  the  claim  of  St.  Peter.  In  answer  tc 
the  pretensions  of  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  the  council  says  to  him, 
*'  As  the  bishop  of  Rome  has  his  primacy  in  Rome,  so  the  bishop  of 
Alexandria  has  his  primacy  in  Alexandria."  It  says  to  him,  "  you 
have  no  cause  to  complain — if  he  has  his  authority,  you  have  yours ; 
in  your  respective  sees,  or  churches,  you  have  the  chief  control ;  but 
it  is  his  prerogative,  as  occupying  the  place  of  Peter,  to  watch  over 
the  welfare  of  all."  "  Neither,"  says  Du  Pin,  "  does  it  disprove 
THE  PRIMACY  OF  ROME."  The  council  offered  a  sedative  to  the  pride 
of  the  bishop  of  Alexandria,  or  asserted  his  authority  in  his  own  see, 
out  it  d<v}8  not  disprove  the  primacy  of  Rome. 


24  DEBATE  ON  THE 

What  more  do  you  want  than  what  God  has  caused  to  be  thus  re- 
corded here  ? 

The  dissension  first  originated  among  the  patriarchal  sees.  The 
counsel  took  cognizance  of  it,  and  decided  according  to  the  rules  and 
usages  of  the  apostolic  and  immediately  subsequent  ages.  From  this, 
whatever  follows,  it  surely  does  not  follow  that  there  was  no  primacy 
in  Rome. 

He  says  that  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  assumed  to  call  himself 
the  universal  bishop,  and  that  the  emperor  winked  at  it.  What  does 
this  mean  ■?  Why  that  the  crafty  emperor,  and  the  more  subtle  bishop 
intended  to  compel  Rome  to  acknowledge  Constantinople  as  hei 
equal.  This  attempt  of  the  emperor  and  the  patriarch  illustrates  the 
point  at  issue,  and  clears  it  in  fact  of  any  difficulty.  They  knew  that 
Rome  was  referred  to  on  every  occasion  ;  and  that  her  decision  was 
final.  They  were  jealous  of  her  authority.  The  manner  of  this  as- 
sumption of  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  and  of  the  emperor  wink- 
ing at  it,  are  in  fact  proofs  of  the  supremacy  of  Rome.  Now,  thought 
the  proud  Greek,  I  will  bring  this  haughty  pontiff  of  Rome  crouchmg 
to  my  feet,  I  will  make  him  surrender  all  his  authority,  and  we,  the 
•emperor  and  myself,  will  divide  the  earth  between  us.  It  was  there- 
fore that  the  bishop  made  this  assumption,-  and  that  the  emperor  winked 
at  it.  It  was  in  this  unjust  and  intolerable  sense  of  the  term  Universal 
Father,  that  Gregory  who  deserves  all  the  praise  which  has  been 
given  him,  and  more,  objected  to  its  assumption.  It  was  thus  that  he 
reprobated  the  title  of  universal  father. 

If  the  bishop  of  Rome  now  claims  to  be  called  the  first  pastor  in 
Christendom,  he  pretends  to  be  no  lord  of  the  consciences  of  his  breth- 
ren, or  dictator  of  the  terms  of  salvation  to  the  servants  of  God. 
He  acknowledges  with  humility  his  own  intrinsic  nothingness,  unless 
supported  by  God,  and  guided  and  guarded  by  him  in  the  administra- 
tion of  his  eminently  responsible  office. 

He  is  a  father  because  he  breaks  the  mystic  bread,  and  dispenses 
the  spiritual  nourishment  of  sound  doctrine  to  the  souls  of  the  people 
of  God.  He  is  a  father  because  to  him  we  appeal  in  our  doubts,  and  to 
him  refer  in  every  emergency,  as  to  the  vicar  of  Christ. 

The  term  Universal  Father  was  likewise  worthy  of  the  condemna- 
tion of  Gregory,  in  the  bad  sense  in  which  it  was  assumed  by  the  pa- 
triarch of  Constantinople,  viz.  that  of  lord  and  master  of  spiritual 
power  and  of  the  consciences  of  the  brethren,  so  as  not  to  need  or  ask 
the  advice  of  the  bishops.  The  pope  never  gives  a  decree  without 
taking  counsel  from  his  constitutional  advisers,  availing  himself  of 
the  light  of  present  wisdom  and  past  experience.  He  takes  all  human 
means  to  weigh  the  subject  well  and  to  come  to  a  sound  and  scriptural 
conclusion.  Discard  the  pope — sever  from  the  communion  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  and  you  lose  all  claim,  or  shadow  of  claim  to  a  con- 
nexion with  the  apostles.  Hear  Waddington  speaking  of  the  Vaudois— 
"  111  our  journev  back  towards  the  apostolic  times,  these  separatists  conduct 
us  as  far  as  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century;  but  when  we  would  advance 
farther,  we  arf  intercepted  by  abroad  region  of  darkness  and  uncertainty.  A 
■park  of  hope  is  indeed  sugsrested  by  the  history  of  the  Vaudois.  Their  origin  is 
not  ascertained  by  any  authentic  record,  and  being  iniraeiiiorial,  it  may  have 
been  coeval  with  the  introduction  of  Christianity. 

"  But  since  there  is  not  one  direct  proof  of  their  existence  during  that  long 
space;  since  they  have  never  been  certainly  discovered  by  the  curiosity  of  any 
writer,  nor   detected   by  the   inqaisitorial  eye  of  any  orthodox   bishop    nor 


R09IAN   CATHOLIC    RKLIGION.  25 

itflrncJ  hy  any  pope,  or  council,  or  any  church  record,  chronicle,  or  memorial. 
we  are  not  justllied  in  attaching  any  historical  credit  to  their  mere  unsuppurtea 
tradition.  It  is  sufficient  to  prove,  that  they  had  an  earlier  existence  than  tli« 
tweltih  century;  but  that  they  had  then  been  perpttualed  through  eight  or 
nine  centuries,  unconuueniorated  abroad,  and  without  any  national  monunieni 
to  attest  their  existence,  is  much  more  than  we  can  venture,  on  such  evidence 
to  assert.  Here  then  the  golden  chain  of  our  apostolic  descent  disappears, 
and  though  it  may  exist,  buried  in  the  darkness  of  those  previous  ages,  ana 
though  some  writers  have  seemed  to  discern  a  few  detached  links  which  thev 
diligently  exhibited,  there  is  still  much  wantmg  to  complete  the  continuity.' 
[Pas^e  534  of  the  History  of  the  Church  from,  the  earliest  ages,  by  Rev.  Geo 
JVaddinglon,  A.  JM.fclhno  (f  Trinity  College,  Cambridge,  and  Prebendary  of 
Kerring,  in  the  cathmral cinirch  of  Chicliesfer,  J^~ew  York  edition,  1S35.] 

Well  if  Christ  established  a  church  on  earth,  that  church  must  be 
catholic.  "  I  believe  in  the  holy  catholic  church,"  is  the  languag^e 
of  the  apostles  and  of  councils,  of  Protestants  as  well  as  of  Catholics. 
The  /ct/e  church  must  be  catholic.  What  church  then  is  catholic! 
The  universe  answers  the  question — Italy,  France,  Spain,  Austria. 
Ireland,  South  America,  Canada,  five  hundred  churches  lately  erected 
in  England,  Calcutta,  Ceylon,  Oceana,  all  the  islands  of  the  Pacific 
and  the  Atlantic :  even  in  every  country  where  Protestantism  is  dom- 
inant, Denmark,  Norway,  Sweden,  the  testimony  is  t;iven,  and  tha 
words  "  I  believe  in  the  holy  catholic  church"  are  used  by  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  who  alone  have  a  right  to  use 
them.  Applied  to  any  other  church  they  are  a  misnomer.  Protestants 
cannot  employ  such  language.  They  are  cut  up  into  a  thousand  dis- 
cordant and  chaotic  sects.  As  no  other  church  but  ours  is  now  cath- 
olic, so  no  other  but  ours  ever  has  been  or  will  be  catholic.  "  Chris- 
tian is  my  name  and  Catholic  my  surname,"  said  Pacian.  With  love 
and  charity  to  all  men  the  Roman  Catholic  church  subsists  throughout 
all  time,  teaches  all  truth,  and  gathers  into  her  communion  the  children 
of  every  clime.  What  she  lost  in  one  region,  she  gained  in  another. 
The  axe  of  persecution  that  lopped  off  some  of  her  branches,  made 
the  vigorous  trunk  produce  the  more  luxuriously. 

"  Investigating,"  says  Fletcher,  "in  those  countries,  where  either  Christianity 
has  once  subsisted,  or  where  it  subsists  at  present — the  monuments  which  thev 
exhibit,  and  interrogating  these  {m,onumtnls  have  voices,  my  brethren,  that  speak 
plainly,) — it  will  be  found  that  the3'  all  loudly  attest  the  greatness  and  the  an- 
tiquity of  our  religion.  "We  are  Catholics,"  the  venerable  ruing  say,  "and 
the  emblems  even,  which  still  adorn  w*,  shew  it."  It  is  so,  likewise,  not  only  in 
the  monuments,  which  were  once,  or  are  yet,  sacred  to  religion,  but  in  a  grea* 
variety  of  other  vestiges.  The  proofs  of  the  ancient  splendor  of  Catholicity  are 
legible  on  almost  every  object,  that  has  seen  the  tide  of  ages  roll  away, — on  the 
palaces  of  princes, — -on  the  castles  of  the  great, — on  the  gates  of  cities, — on  the 
asyiunis  of  charity, — on  the  tombs  of  the  dead.  They  may  be  read  in  the  con- 
stitutions and  laws  of  kingdoms — in  the  foundations  and  rules  of  universities, — 
in  the  customs  and  peculiarities  of  the  vulgar.  *  #   »  «   *  « 

It  is  indeed,  possible  that  prejudice  may  object  to  those  arguments,  that 
"they  are  very  general  and  intlistinct, — proving,  it  is  true,  that  in  almost  every 
nation,  and  in  every  age,  there  has  existed  a  widely  diffused  religion, — a  Catholic 
religion,  but  not  proving  that  this  religion,  its  principles  and  doctrines,  were  '.i 
every  age  the  same — in  every  age,  the  identical  religion,  which  the  Catholic  be- 
lieves at  present."  It  is  the  essence  of  the  true  religion  to  remain  unchanged  ; 
and  to  have  descended,  and  to  descend  always,  down  the  streamof  time,  without 
corruption  or  alteration.  If,  therefore,  I  undertake  distinctly  to  prove,  that  th-: 
Catholic  religion  of  the  present  period  is  indeed,  the  true  religion,  thensbouli 
I  also  distinctly  prove  that  it  has  never  undergone  any  alteration,  and  that  it  ii 
the  same,  which,  revealed  originally  to  mankind,  has,  during  the  course  of  eigh- 
teen centuries,  formed  always  the  object  of  the  veneration  of  the  orthodcx  be- 
liever." vol.  2,  p.  173 

C  4 


2G 


DKBATE    Oy    IHE 


"  As  it  was  the  detifrn  of  God,  that  the  true  church  shouM  be  Cathofic;  »o  H 
Tras  also  his  desien.  that  the  true  church  sboutd  always  be  dfstin^uished  by  the 
lionoraMe  appellation  of  Catholic: — as  it  was  the  will  of  Jesus  Ctirist,  that  the 
estabUsbinent  which  he  formed,  should  extend  through  every  nation,  and  subsist 
ihrough  everj-  age;  so  alto  it  was  his  will,  that  this  establishment  should  be  dig- 
nified \>y  a  itaine  correspondfng  to  these  great  characteristics.  "  I  believe."  the 
aposiies  comniarded  the  faithful  in  every  age  to  9ay,"?n  the  holy  Cathouc 
Chiircn. '  "by  this  name  Catholic,"  says  St.  Austin,  "■  7  rnn  retained  in  the 
Catholic  churchy"  '*  my  name"  adds  St.  Pacian,  "is  Christian;  my  nimame 
Catholic;  and  by  this  surname,  /  nw  distinguished  /ram  all  the  sects  of 
heresy.  Sermon  on  the  catholicity  of  the  church,  page  195,  vol.  ii.  BaU. 
edit.  1830. 

It  IS  certainly,  my  beloTed  frseQds,a  venr  animating  circunistance,to  viewth« 
iinmeDsny  and  the  k)r^  duration  of  our  church;  to  see  it  stretcking  out  its  enf- 
pire  through  every  climate;  consoling  by  its  benefits,  and  eulighlening  bj-  its  doc- 
trines, the  remotes*,  corners  of  the  universe:  to  see  it  existing  through  the  long 
lapse  oi  so  many  ages,  unmoved,  while  the  strongest  empires  sink  to  ruin;  antl 
unshaken,  while  all  things  fall  in  decay  around  it.  It  is  animating  to  remark  it 
triumphant  OTer  all  the  powers  of  darkness,  and  the  exertions  of  human  malice, 
combating  often,  it  is  true,  with  the  storms  of  persecution  and  the  artifices  of 
heresy;  yet  combating,  always,  to  come  off  with  victory';  riding  throogh  the  tem- 
pest, and  exalted  by  the  very  means  which  had  been  levelled  at  its  depressiow 
Ibid,  p^e  198. 

From  this  contemplation,  nire-  christian  friends,  we  may  derive  the  consoling 
assurance,  that  haprpen  or  befal  what  may,  though  the  billows  of  persecution 
swell  and  the  tide  of  error  rage;  everj-  efiort  to  destroy  the  church  shall  turn 
out  fruitless.  The  church,  these  scenesassnre  you,  I's  an  edifice  protected  by  the 
hand  of  the  Almighty,  a  rock  fixed  on  the  basis  of  the  divine  po^wer  amid  tha 
sea  of  human  life.  The  billows  of  persecution  shall  swell,  the  tide  of  error 
dash  against  it  ip  vain.  They  will  no  more  more  it,  although  they  may,  iiv- 
deed,  sweep  away  maoy  of  its  ungoarded  niembers,  than  the  genAst  spray 
will  move  the  firmest  mountain  that  the  ocean  laves.  1  should  be  sorry  to  see 
the  misfortune  happen,  yet  could  I  behold  the  most  Ynrrous  tempest  gathering 
without  one  feeli.ig  of  anxiety  for  the  stability  of  the  chnrch.  As  the  I'salmist 
Miys,  "i<  should  rome  to  j*othing.  like  the  running  water,"  (Ps.  Fvii.)  It  v.ouW 
prove  but  the  preparatTon  for  fresh  coBquests.  The  security  of  the  church  amid 
storms,  during  the  long'  Hiterval  of  eighteen  centuries,  is  aJone  sufficient  assur- 
ance of  its  security,  amid  the  fury  of  future  tempest.     Ibidem,  pau'e  198. 

If  it  can  be  proved  thai  the  Catholic  chnreh  had  not  these 
characteristics,  we  admit  she  is  not  the  church  of  Christ.  I  shall  go 
to  trial  on  this  point.  If  sheha-sever  ceased  to  teach  the  whole  doc- 
trine of  Christ,  to  diffuse  over  all  nations,  the  tnie  christian  precepts, 
or  if  she  has  not  had  a  larger  body  of  professors,  than  any  of  the  sects, 
that  separated  in  every  successive  age  from  her  communion,  then  will 
I  yield  the  question.  Bnt  it  will  try  the  ingenurty  of  the  gentleman 
to  prove  any  such  thing,  and  still  more,  to  show  in  that  case,  what 
church  was  catholic,  'fhis  diflScuIty  meets  him  at  the  very  threshold. 
[Time  expired} 

TTiree  o'clock,  P.  M, 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

My  learned  and  worthy  opponent  commenced  his  forenoon  speech, 
sayinsT  that  he  found  before  hrm  a  more  easy  task  than  he  had  expect- 
ed. Were  it  a  question  of  rhetoric  rather  than  of  logic,  I  confess  ] 
should  have  mort  to  fear.  He  has  been  more  accustomed  than  I,  to 
the  dupiay  ot  that  art.  I  am  rather  a  matter  of  fact  man,  and  logic 
more  man  rhetoric  has  occupied  my  attention. 

I  apprehend,  however,  before  this  discussion  is  ended  he  may  find 
his  task  not  quite  so  easy  as  he  would  seem  to  anticipate.  And  to  me 
the  good  book  has  suggested  a  caution  which  I  hope,  always  to  remem- 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  27 

bcr.     It  is  liappily  couched  in  these  words, "  Let  not  him  that  buck- 
leth  on  his  armor  boast  as  he  that  taketh  it  off." 

But  to  examine  his  defence,  so  far  as  in  it  there  is  reference  to  my 
speech,  has  he  not  made  in  the  very  first  effort  an  unfortunate  admis- 
sion 1  'J'he  name  Catholi-c  he  admits  is  generic  and  the  name  Roman 
specific, — and  that  the  term  i?oman  only  indicated  the  church  in  which 
this  catholic  communion  is  to  be  enjoyed  :  that  the  universal  church 
is  found  in  the  particular,  the  genus  in  the  species.  Thus  we  can 
have  Greek  catholic,  English  catholic,  American  catholic,  as  well 
as  Roman  catholic.  These  particular  universals  are  susceptible  of 
indefinite  multiplication.  And  so  the  catholicity  of  Rome  is  specifi- 
cally the  same  with  that  of  England  !  ! 

His  second  admission  is  equally  unfortunate.  He  did  not  seem  to 
•perceive  that  he  argued  for  me  rather  than  against  me,  on  the  word 
father.  He  said  that  it  could  not  be  understood  literally.  So  said  I. 
How  then  must  it  be  used  but  religiously  ]  Call  no  man  your  religious, 
or  ecclesiastic  Father.  He  has  then  fully  conceded  all  that  I  ask.  It 
is  then  an  absolute  prohibition  of  the  Roman  Catholic  notion  of  a 
supreme  holy  father.  To  designate  any  person  pope  is  then  a  viola- 
tion of  Christ's  command. 

The  gentleman  has  admitted,  somewhat  reluctantly  however,  that 
the  Doway  catechism  is  a  standard  work,  and  that  the  definition  of 
the  church  is  infallibly  correct.  My  argument  hitherto  has  hern  to 
shew  that  the  supreme  head  called  pope,  being  of  the  essential  ele- 
ments, nay  the  chief  element  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  and  not 
found  either  in  the  bible  or  ecclesiastic  history  for  ages  after  the  chris- 
tian era,  the  church  of  Rome  is  a  sect  in  the  true  import  of  that 
word,  and  not  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches,  for  she  cannot 
be  older  than  her  head,  unless  a  body  can  exist  without  and  before  its 
head,  which  is  impossible.  It  is  not  the  nature  of  that  head,  whether 
political  or  ecclesiastic  or  both,  but  the  simple  fact  of  its  existence 
concerning  which  we  enquire.  The  nature  and  claims  of  the  head 
may  hereafter  be  the  subject  of  examination.  That  the  Roman  sect 
is  divided  into  four  parties,  touching  the  supremacy — one  affirming 
that  the  pope  is  the  fountain  of  all  power  political  and  religious — 
another  teaching  that  he  has  only  ecclesiastic  supremacy — a  third 
party  affirming  that  his  ecclesiastic  dominion  is  over  all  councils,  per- 
sons and  things  spiritual,  and  a  fourth  party  limiting  his  jurisdiction 
to  a  sort  of  executive  p.residency — is  a  proposition  susceptible  of 
ample  proof,  and  of  much  importance,  but  we  wish  it  to  be  very 
distinctly  stated  that  the  question  now  before  us  is  the  fact  that  d 
head,  or  universal  father,  pope  or  patriarch,  is  not  found  in  the  Roman 
empire,  east  or  west,  for  six  hundred  years,  and  consequently  that 
during  that  time  that  church  did  not  exist,  who&e  four  essential  ele- 
ments, are  a  pope  or  supreme  head,  bishops,  pastors  and  laity. 

I  am  the  more  diffuse  on  this  point  because  my  learned  opponent 
eeems  to  mistake  the  question  or  to  confound  it  with  another  of  a  diffe- 
rent category.  He  seems  to  be  squinting  at  infallibility,  authority, 
order  in  the  ministry,  rather  than  looking  in  the  face  the  simple  ques- 
tion, was  there  a  pope  in  any  church  for  the  first  six  centuries  ?  Authority 
is  not  infallibility,  nor  is  order,  supremacy.  I  go  for  authority  in  the 
president  of  the  United  States,  but  who  infers  thence  that  I  hold  the 
president  to  be  infallible  !  I  go  for  order  in  the  christian  church,  but 
what  has  this  to  do  witli  the  supremacy  of  the  bishop  of  Rome'' 


28  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Why,  I  emphatically  ask,  does  the  bishop  of  Cincinnati  confound  the 
question  of  fact  before  us  with  that  concerning  the  Levitical  priest- 
hood.    I  have  not  agitated  such  a  question. 

And  what  have  my  views  of  church  order  and  government  to  do 
with  the  question  before  us.  Why  drag  these  matters  into  discussion. 
Did  I  not  distinctly  say  that  I  came  not  here  to  defend  the  tenets  of 
any  party  of  Protestants,  but  the  great  principles  of  Protestantism  I 
And  what  have  my  views  of  church  order  to  do  with  the  questions  at 
issue!  Of  these  however  the  gentleman  is  wholly  misinformed.  I  am 
the  advocate  of  order,  of  a  christian  ministry,  o^  bishops  and  deacons 
in  the  church.  Without  order  no  society  can  exist,  and  therefore  no 
reasonable  man  can  object  either  to  order  or  authority  in  the  church 
But  again  I  ask  what  is  this  to  the  question  in  debate  ! 

He  gave  us  too  a  dissertation  on  the  passage,  "  lovest  thou  me  more 
than  these."  This  is  certainly  gratuitous  at  this  time.  I  am  glad 
however  the  gentleman  has  delivered  himself  on  this  text.  But  this 
is  not  the  question  now.  We  are  seeking  for  a  head  for  the  church, 
a  papal  head  for  the  church  in  the  first  ages,  while  our  friend  is  ex- 
pounding scriptures  on  other  themes. 

To  the  authority  of  Du  Pin  the  gentleman  seems  to  except.  But 
on  what  authority  does  he  object  ?  His  works  are  certified  by  the 
doctors  of  the  Sorbonne  and  by  the  guardians  of  the  Catholic  press. 
Will  he  say  that  he  is  not  an  authentic  historian  ?  Du  Pin  was  born 
and  educated,  lived  and  died  and  was  buried  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
church.  The  gentleman  proved,  two  or  three  months  ago,  that  general 
La  Faj'ette  was  a  Roman  Catholic  because  he  was  baptized  in  the 
church  of  Rome  and  buried  in  consecrated  ground.  Certainly  then 
Du  Pin  was  all  this  and  more !  It  matters  not  whether  he  was  a  Jan- 
senist  or  Jesuit.  Both  orders  have  been  at  different  times  in  good  and 
bad  repute.  Jansenists  have  sometimes  been  proscribed,  and  Jesuits 
have  been  suppressed.  But  the  question  is  not,  was  he  a  good  Ca- 
tholic, but  was  he  an  aufhentic  historian  ?  For  a  good  Catholic  is  one 
thing,  and  a  good  historian  is  another.  I  wish  the  gentleman  to 
answer.  (Bishop  Purcell.  1  answer  emphatically,  he  was  not  an  au- 
thentic historian.) 

Then  this  gentleman  and  the  bishop  of  Bardstown  are  at  variance. 
The  latter  gentleman,  if  I  mistake  not,  admitted  in  a  discussion  pub- 
lished in  the  Catholic  paper  of  that  place,  that  Du  Pin  was  an  authen- 
tic historian.  I  have  seen  this  work  repeatedly  quoted  in  discussions 
between  Romanists  and  Protestants,  and  I  do  not  recollect  to  have 
seen  any  thingr  advanced  against  his  authenticity.  Mr.  Hughes  of 
Philadelphia,  but  on  ditTerent  grounds  than  those  stated  by  my  opponent, 
did  indeed  object  to  him  as  a  faithful  witness  in  his  controversy  with 
Mr.  Breckenridge.  However  while  I  wish  it  to  go  to  the  public  that 
bishop  Purcell  has  objected  to  Du  Pin  as  an  authentic  historian,  I  will 
distinctly  state  that  I  rely  upon  him  in  this  controversy  only  so  far  as 
he  is  sustained  by  other  historians,  and  therefore  I  will  only  quote 
him  in  such  matters  as  I  know  can  be  sustained  from  other  sources. 
Other  historians  record  the  same  fact,  and  many  of  the  works  which 
Du  Pin  quotes  are  not  only  extant  but  accessible. 

The  word  catholic  the  gentleman  has  stated  that  it  is  of  high  anti- 
quity and  found  at  the  head  of  some  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
But  how  came  it  into  the  New  Testament  ?  Was  it  Robert  Stephens 
of  Paris  tiiat  placed  it  there  in  the  16th  century  as  a  sort  of  generai 


EOMAN    CATHOLIC    REMGION,  29 

neading  to  certain  epistles,  or  was  it  placed  there  by  the  apostles 
themselves  1 

Touching  the  council  of  Nice  and  whether  Sylvester  had  anything 
to  do  with  its  convocation,  may  hereafter  be  worthy  of  discussion ; 
at  present  this  is  not  before  us.  The  decree  of  the  council  and  its 
convocation   are  distinct  things. 

Of  the  texts  relied  on  by  me  to  dispose  of  the  pretensions  of  supre- 
macy, the  gentleman  has  taken  special  exception  to  Ep.  iv.  11.  and 
would  have  different  orders  of  ecclesiastic  powers,  rather  than  gift* 
for  the  edification  of  the  church  and  the  fitting  of  saints  for  the  work 
of  the  ministry,  to  be  contained  in  that  passage.  But  the  text  says 
e;ifts  and  not  lordships.  Of  these  gifts  vouchsafed  by  the  ascended 
Savior  the  first  was  apostles.  "  He  gave  first  apostles,  secondarily 
prophets,"  and  here  again  "  he  gave  some  apostles  and  some  pro- 
phets." No  supremacy  is  expressed  of  an  individual.  It  is  not  ranks 
of  authorities  like  civil  or  military  functionaries,  such  as  magistrates, 
aldermen,  constables,  &c.,  but  gifts  of  light  and  knowledge  and  grace, 
the  splendid  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  gifts  of  teaching,  preaching,  ex- 
horting, and  setting  up  the  tabernacle  or  church.  'Fhe  apostles  had 
all  authority  and  all  gifts  themselves;  but  they  needed  assistants  and 
a  distribution  of  labor,  and  not  an  hierarchy,  in  laying  the  foundation 
and  in  fitting  saints  for  the  work  of  the  christian  ministry. 

Having  now  touched  all  the  relevant  points  in  the  Bishop's  opening 
speech,  I  hasten  to  my  argument. 

On  examination  of  the  New  Testament,  the  primitive  fathers,  the 
councils  both  provincial  and  general,  down  to  the  close  of  the  6th  cen- 
tury, we  do  not  find  in  the  whole  territory  claimed  by  our  opponents 
as  yet,  the  idea  or  name  of  a  supreme  head,  pope,  or  vicar  of  Christ. 

My  learned  antagonist  has  not  produced  any  such  document,  and 
doubtless  he  knows  if  there  be  any  such  authority  now  extant,  and 
would  produce  it. 

The  strong  expressions  of  Saint  Gregory  in  opposition  to  the  title 
shew  what  a  singular  novelty  it  was  in  Rome  during  "  his  pontifi- 
cate," and  his  bold  declaration  not  only  of  the  arrogance  and  blas- 
phemy of  the  title,  but  of  its  aspect  to  all  the  bishops,  as  annulling 
their  equality,  sufficiently  prove  that  he  rightly  appreciated  its  true 
meaning  and  its  hostility  to  the  genius  of  that  simplicity  and  humility 
which  comported  with  the  servants  of  Christ.  So  far  then  as  we  have 
examined  the  evidence  on  hand,  the  defence  of  the  Bishop,  the  argu- 
ment as  now  developed  stands  thus  : — a  pope,  or  universal  patriarch, 
is  the  first  essential  element  of  the  Roman  Catholic  sect.  But  there 
was  no  such  personage  in  existence  for  600  years  after  Christ,  there- 
fore there  was  no  church  of  Rome,  in  the  sense  of  the  creed,  during 
the  first  six  centuries. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  narrate  the  circumstances  which  ushered 
into  being  the  pope  of  Rome.  Mauritius  the  emperor  of  the  East  died 
'it  the  hand  of  Phocas  a  centurion  of  his  own  army.  Mauritius  fa- 
vored the  pretensions  of  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  and  turned  a 
deaf  ear  to  the  importunities  of  Gregory  on  the  subject  of  taking  from 
bishop  John  the  title  of  universal  father,  so  painful  to  the  pride  and 
humility  of  the  great  Gregory.  For  the  saint  had  written  to  the  em- 
peror on  the  arrogance  of  John,  metropolitan  of  the  great  diocese  of 
the  east.  Mauritius  was  supplanted  and  the  throne  usurped  by  Pim- 
cas.  Gregory  re'oiced  at  his  death,  and  hailed  the  elevation  of  his 
c2 


30  DEBATE    ON    THE 

murderer  to  the  throng.  Gregory  consecrated  him,  in  the  church 
of  Si.  John  the  Baptist  at  Constantinople,  and  Phocas,  as  a  re 
ward  for  his  consecration  and  favorable  regards,  conferred  upon  the 
successor  of  Gregory,  Boniface  the  third,  the  title  of  universal  patri- 
arch in  the  very  sense  in  which  it  had  been  repudiated  by  Gregory. 
Thus  in  the  year  606  two  years  after  the  death  of  the  saint,  the 
first  pope  was  placed  in  the  chair  of  the  Galilean  fisherman,  if  in- 
deed Peter  had  ever  sat  in  a  chair  inRome. 

Concerning  the  consecration  of  Phocas,  Mr.  Gibbon  thus  remarks : 

*'  The  senate  and  clergy  obeved  his  sununons,  and  as  soon  as  the  patriarch 
was  assured  of  his  orthodox  belief,  he  consecrated  the  successful  usurper  in  the 
church  of  St.  John  the  Baptist.  On  the  third  day,  amidst  the  acclau)ations  of  a 
thoughtless  people,  Phocas  made  his  public  entry  in  a  chariot  drawn  by  four 
white  horses:  the  revolt  of  the  troops  was  rewarded  by  a  lavish  donation,  and 
the  new  sovereign,  after  visiting  the  palace,  beheld  from  his  throne  the  games 
of  the  hippodrome."     Gibbon's  Decline  and  Fall  Rom.  Emp.  vol.  viii,  p.  269. 

But  the  infidel  has  good  reason  to  laugh  at  the  saint,  where  he  re- 
cords the  exultation  of  Gregory  at  the  death  of  Mauritius. 

"  As  a  subject  and  a  christian  it  was  the  duty  of  Gregory  to  acquiesce  in  the 
established  government;  but  the  joyful  applause  with  which  he  salutes  the  for» 
tunes  of  the  assassin,  has  sullied  with  indelible  disgrace  the  character  of  the 
saint.  The  successor  of  the  apostles  might  have  inculcated  with  decent  firm- 
ness the  guilt  of  blood,  and  the  necessity  of  repentance:  he  is  content  to  ^ele- 
brate  the  deliverance  of  the  people  and  the  fall  of  the  oppressor;  to  rejoice  that 
the  piety  and  benignity  of  Phocas  have  been  raised  by  Providence  to  the  imperial 
throne;  to  pray  that  his  hands  may  be  strengthened  against  all  his  enemies  ;  and 
to  express  a  wish,  perhaps  a  prophecy,  that  after  a  long  and  triumphant  reign,  he 
may  be  transferred  from  a  temporal  to  an  everlasting  kingdom."   Id.  ib.  p.  211. 

It  looks  indeed  as  if  Gregory  had  permitted  the  recollection  of  the 
conduct  of  Mauritius  towards  his  rival  to  mingle  with  his  exultations 
at  the  elevation  of  Phocas.  When  we  recollect  that  Mauritius,  his 
wife,  four  sons  and  three  daughters  were  immolated  at  the  shrine  of 
the  ambition  of  Phocas  because  he  feared  a  rival,  we  are  astonished 
that  saint  Gregory  could  have  called  heaven  and  earth  to  rejoice  in  his 
exaltation  to  the  throne  of  the  Caesars.     His  words  are  : 

**  Btnignitatem  ve,«trae  pietatis  ad  imperiale  fastigium  pervenisse  gaudemus. . 
Laetentur  cusli  et  exultet  terra,  et  de  vestris  benignis  actibus  iiniversu  rtipublic:B 
populus  nunc  usque  vehementer  afflictus  hilarescat,"  &c.  Gres:.  I.  xi.  ep.  38,  ind.  vi. 

It  is  not  so  honorable  to  the  successors  of  Boniface  the  third,  that 
the  title  of  pope  in  its  supreme  import,  was  conferred  by  so  mean  a 
wretch  as  Phocas  the  usuper  and  murderer,  and  rather  as  a  reward  for 
the  temporizing  and  easy  virtue  of  Gregory  the  first.  Boniface,  though 
ill  the  catalogue  of  popes  he  stands  the  66th  in  descent  from  Peter,  was 
in  truth  the  first  pope  of  Rome  in  the  sense  which  is  placed  in  the 
Catechisms  and  standards  of  the  present  church  of  Rome. 

As  yet  the  power  was  only  ecclesiastic.  But  power  is  naturally 
cumulative,  and  especially  ecclesiastic.  Let  any  person  be  imagin- 
ed to  wear  at  his  girdle  the  keys  of  heaven,  and  the  sword  of  spiritual 
power,  let  him  have  kings  and  princes  bowing  at  his  footstool,  and 
we  shall  soon  see  him  like  Napoleon,  stretching  out  his  hand  not  only 
to  grasp  the  gorgeous  crown  of  ecclesiastic  but  of  political  power. 

But  to  complete  the  story  of  the  origin  of  the  papal  power  we  must 
add  a  few  words  on  the  assumptions  of  Saint  Zachary,  or  Stephen  the 
Second.  Pepin  the  father  of  Charlemagne  was  in  the  cabinet  of 
Childeric  the  king  of  France  in  those  days.  His  master  was  a  feeble 
prince  and  he  was  an  ambitious  minister.  He  knew  the  power  of  the 
pope,  and  before  he  dared  to  seize  the  throne  of  his  master  he  deemed 


KOMAN   CAl-HOLIC    RELIGION.  31 

it  politic  to  consult  the  vicar  of  Christ.  He  placed  himself  before  him 
in  this  casuistic  style.  "  Sir,"  said  he,  "  whether  is  he  that  has  the 
name  of  prince  without  the  power,  or  he  who  has  the  power  without 
the  name,  the  rightful  sovereign  of  a  nation  V  The  pope  answered 
him  according  to  his  wish.  He  was  then  absolved  from  all  self  cri- 
mination, he  seized  the  crown  of  his  master,  and  rewarded  the  pope 
with  some  temporal  power : — certain  states  in  Italy  which  by  his  son 
Charles  the  great  were  augmented,  till  he  had  the  dominion  of  the 
ancient  Heruli — the  Ostrogoths  and  the  Exarchate  of  Ravennah  su- 
peradded to  his  spiritual  jurisdiction.  Then  did  he  assume  the  triple 
crown  and  the  two  swords,  and  stood  forth  in  full  attire  as  filling  all 
the  prophetic  characters  of  the  supreme  head  of  that  politico-eccle 
elastic  corporation  called  the  church  of  Rome. — [Time  expired.] 

Half  past  3  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Purcell — 

Fellow  citizens — My  friend  objects  to  my  explanation  of  the  term 
"Roman  Catholic."  He  observes  that  it  has  turned  out  no  explana- 
tion at  all.  His  difficulty  of  apprehension  on  this  particular  point,  is  to 
me,  however,  perfectly  intelligible.  The  very  name  of  our  church  is 
a  proof  of  its  unity  and  universality  ;  and  this,  as  he  dislikes  it,  he 
cannot,  of  course,  understand.  The  word  '  catholic'  in  ancient  days 
was  used,  as  many  other  old  and  new  words  in  Webster's  dictionary, 
for  more  purposes  than  one.  Its  true  and  principal  sense  was  easily 
ascertained  in  its  application  to  the  whole  catholic  church  of  Christ. 
It  was  also  used  to  designate  the  authority  of  certain  chief  national 
churches,  to  distinguish  them  from  inferior  churches  in  the  same  dis- 
tricts, and  to  mark  the  superiority  of  archbishops  and  patriarchs  over 
their  brethren  in  the  Episcopacy.  The  name  of  "Roman  Catholic" 
shewed  the  bond  of  union  which  bound  all  these  various  churches  ia 
the  profession  of  the  faith  of  the  chief  see  of  the  entire  christian 
world.  Hence  it  always  brought  to  the  believer's  mind,  in  every 
clime,  the  church  which  was  the  head, — the  great,  primitive,  senior 
church,  the  church  of  Rome ;  and  as  more  people  became  converted 
to  the  faith,  they  were  called  by  their  different  and  distinct  appella- 
tions, as  English  Roman  Catholics — American  Roman  Catholics — 
French  Roman  Catholics,  &c. 

As  to  the  prohibition  from  calling  any  man  '  Father,''  &c.  I  said  it 
was  not  meant  literally,  and  this  he  seizes  as  an  admission  that  it  is 
a  prohibition  from  calling  "  Father"  in  an  ecclesiastical  sense.  This 
may  be  true  or  not,  but  it  does  not  prohibit  us  from  calling  the  head 
of  our  church  "  father"  as  one  who  cherishes,  instructs,  and  otherwise 
acts  the  part  of  a  father  towards  us ;  as  he  who  adopts  an  orphan 
child  is,  in  a  figurative  sense,  his  father,  though  not  literally  married 
to  his  mother.  The  gentleman  cannot  therefore  understand  me  as 
admitting  his  argument  in  my  previous  explanation.  But  this  is  mat-- 
ter  too  insignificant  to  waste  more  time  on  it. 

Mr.  Campbell  tells  us  the  church  had  no  head  for  600  years.  This 
is  a  strange  representation  !  The  church  was  then  a  headless  body. 
I  never  heard  of  a  body  without  a  head,  on  which  all  the  members 
depend  for  the  vital  influences.  But  was  there  indeed  no  head  to  the 
church  1  Was  not  Jesus  Christ  the  head?  and  I  say  further  that  his 
servant  on  earth,  his  humble  servant,  was  the  pope.  The  language 
of  Chris*  himself,  "  on  this  rock  will  I  build  my  church,"  refers  not 


32  DEBATE    OJf    THE 

to  the  divme  head  of  the  church  in  Heaven,  hut  to  the  representative 
cf  his  divine  commission  on  earth.  I  affirm  that  what  Christ  thought 
necessary  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  is  necessary  now ;  and  the 
more  remote  we  are  from  that  day,  the  more  necessary  does  it  become. 
Jesus  Christ  well  knew  that  there  must  be  scandals  and  errors  ;  and 
he  determined  his  church  should  not  be  left  headless.  We  know  this 
head  exists  and  where  it  resides ;  but  we  are  not  slaves  in  the  Ca- 
tholic church.  We  acknowledge  no  mere  human  authority  between 
us  TLXui  God.  We  are  as  free  and  untrammeled  as  any  people  under 
heaven.  It  is  not  the  man,  but  the  authority,  we  respect.  The  man 
may  err,  and  if  the  pope  claims  a  power  not  belonging  to  him,  we 
soon  remind  him  of  his  mistake.  How  this  lesson  has  been  taught 
to  a  few  popes,  the  history  of  the  church  will  show. 

My  friend  now  contradicts  the  statement  he  made  to-day.  He  first 
argued  that  the  introduction  of  patriarchs,  archbishops,  bishops, 
deacons,  and  so  on,  into  the  church,  was  of  exotic  growth — and,  as  if  he 
had  forgotten  what  he  had  previously  denied,  he  turns  round,  and  tells 
us,*nearly  in  the  same  breath,  that  he  goes  for  bishops  and  deacons  and 
orders.  So  far  then,  Mr.  Campbell  is  a  good  Catholic,  and  I  congra- 
tulate him  on  this  advance  towards  the  truth.  [Symptoms  of  applause 
in  the  andience,  were  here  manifested,  but  were  immediately  checked 
by  the  moderators ;  and  bishop  Purcell  besought  them,  once  for  all, 
to  abstain  from  the  least  demonstration  of  the  kind  during  the  debate. 
It  was  improper  in  a  discussion  of  this  character,  and  the  house  being 
greatly  crowded,  much  inconvenience  would  follow,  and  the  debate 
could  net  go  on.] 

As  to  the  authority  he  has  produced  here  (Du  Pin's  Ecclesiastical 
history)  I  will  remark  that  I  consider  Du  Pin  a  learned  man.  I  would 
even  select  him  as  a  splendid  illustration  of  the  strength  imparted  to 
the  human  intellect  by  the  Catholic  intellectual  discipline.  He  was 
truly  a  prodigy  of  learning  and  of  precision  of  style.  But  there  was 
a  plague  spot,  a  gangrene  upon  him,  which  must  forever  neutralize  his 
authority  as  a  Catholic.  Before  the  gentleman  pronounced  his  name 
we  had  a  flourish  of  rhetoric,  and  a  labored  eulogy  upon  my  tact  in 
managing  this  controversy.  For  my  part,  I  must  say  that  1  am  quite 
a  novice  in  these  matters — I  am  not  accustomed  to  debate.  My  friend 
has  complimented  me  upon  oratorical  powers  to  which  I  la}'  no  claim. 
If  I  have  any  advantage,  I  owe  it  not  to  practice  but  to  the  force  of  truth. 

Du  Pin,  on  whom  my  friend  relies  as  Catholic  authority,  recognized 
by  the  church,  was  in  constant  correspondence  with  Wake,  the  arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury.  He  tried  every  stratagem  to  bring  about  a 
re-union  of  the  church  of  England,  and  ihe  church  of  Rome.  Jicib- 
nitz,  and  many  a  distinguished  name,  had  previously  labored  in  the 
same  vocation.  But  Revd.  Dr.  Du  Pin's  motives  were,  unfortunately, 
suspicious.  He  proposed  as  the  basis  of  the  re-union,  the  abolition 
of  auriculae  confession,  of  religious  vows,  of  the  Lenten  fast  and  ab- 
stinence, of  the  pope's  supremacy,  and  of  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy. 
He  was  himself,  like  Cranmer,  secretly  married ;  and  after  his  death, 
bis  pretended  wife  came  publicly  forward  to  assert  her  right  to  his 
goods  and  chattels.     And  this  is  Catholic  authority ! 

It  is  said  these  papers  were  discovered  in  his  study  after  bis  death. 
But  he  was  censured  by  pope  Clement  XI.  even  during  his  life-time; 
and  when,  as  I  have  stated,  Louis  XIV.  removed  him  from  among  th« 
Doctors  of  the  Sorbonne,  Clement  approved  the  act. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  33 

If  my  friend  can  produce  Roman  Catholic  authority,  l*;t  him  do  so. 
But  let  him  not  produce  one  that  approaches  with  a  mask.  Tlie 
authority  of  Du  Pin  I  have  challenged  on  just  grounds ;  but  this  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  views  I  have  stated  upon  the  great  question 
we  are  discussing. 

We  are  told  that  the  commission  spoken  of  in  Ephesians,  4th 
chapter,  "  To  some  he  gave  apostles,  &c."  confers,  not  powers,  but 
simply  gifts.  This  I  deny.  St.  Paul  tells  us  authority  was  given  to 
the  rulers  of  his  church  by  Christ,  not  for  their  sakes  but  that  we  may 
he  no  longer  children  tossed  to  and  fro  by  every  wind  of  doctrine.  They 
were  not,  then,  merely  gifts,  they  were  powers  and  authorities  to  re- 
gulate the  church,  and  to  rule  the  people  of  God.  These  commissions 
are  the  foundation  of  the  church  established  on  earth  by  Christ,  before 
he  ascended  on  high.  They  were  necessary,  as  the  more  solid  parts 
of  a  temple  are  first  laid,  that  the  whole  building  may  afterwards 
have  strength,  consistency,  and  symmetry.  I  deny  that  the  church, 
ever  has  been  or  could  be  without  a  foundation.  The. foundation  is 
at  least  as  necessary  as  the  superstructure.  Christ  made  Peter,  there- 
fore, the  rock  of  his  church,  and  was  himself  the  comer  stone  whereon 
that  rock  rested,  as  did  the  whole  edifice  securely  rest  upon  the  rock. 

Why  has  Mr.  Campbell  anticipated  the  subject  of  the  third  or 
fourth  day  of  this  discussion,  and  brought  up  the  pope  as  the  man  of 
sin — the  sea  monster  of  Daniel — the  youngest  horn  of  the  beast]  &c. 
For  aught  I  know,  he  may  prove  the  pope  to  be  the  sea  serpent — no 
doubt  his  powers  of  logic  are  adequate  to  the  task.     We  shall  see. 

Again — the  pope  is  not  a  tyrant,  nor  does  he  claim  the  title  of  Uni- 
versal Father,  in  the  sense  in  which  Gregory  rebuked  John  for  claiming 
it.  Mr.  Campbell  has  solved  the  question  beforehand,  in  stating  the 
arrogant  pretensions  of  the  bishop  of  C.  P.  who  pretended  that  all  au- 
thority proceeded  from  him.  I  do  not  derive  all  my  authority  from  the 
pope.  The  bishops  of  the  United  States  consult  together.  They  propose 
candidates  for  the  vacant  sees ;  and  they  send  to  Rome  the  names  of 
three  clergymen,  marked  according  to  their  judgment,  "Worthy, 
Worthier,  Worthiest."  The  pope  generally  trusts  to  their  wisdom, 
and  acquiesces  in  their  choicf.  It  was  thus  that  a  certain  testimony 
of  my  fitness  to  succeed  the  venerable  Fenwick,  as  bishop  of  this 
diocese,  was  forwarded  to  Rome.  The  sovereign  pontiff,  Gregory 
XVI.  ratified  the  selection  of  the  prelacy  of  the  United  States,  and 
expedited  the  brief,  or  letters,  in  Tirtue  of  which  I  was  ordained  a 
bishop ;  but  my  power  to  consecrate,  to  baptize,  and  to  perform  other 
episcopal  functions,  comes  not  from  the  pope ;  it  comes  like  that  of 
the  apostles,  directly  from  God. 

There  are  other  denominations,  besides  the  Catholic,  that  contend 
for  the  necessity  of  apostolical  succession  of  orders  and  mission,  and 
these  too  are  the  objects  of  my  friend's  sarcasm.  I  select  only  two — 
the  Episcopalians  and  the  German  Reformed. 

In  the  last  number  of  his  Millennial  Harbinger,  in  speaking  of  the 
Episcopalian  bishop  Otey  of  Tennessee,  he  asks  "why  is  bishop  Otey 
silent]  He  either  feels  that  his  castle  of  Episcopalianism  has  been 
demolished  by  the  editor  of  the  Harbinger  (Mr.  Campbell)  or  he  does 
not.  If  he  feels  that  it  has  been  overthrown,  as  an  honest  man  he 
ought  to  acknowledge  it.  But  if  he  still  thinks  that  he  is  adorning 
•'  the  doctrine  of  God''''  by  sustaining  Episcopalianism,  let  him  shew 
liis  strength  to  such  as  wish  to  read  both  sides  of  the  question.     It  is 

3 


34  DEBATE    ON    THE 

an  apostolic  admoni'ion  to  "contend  earnestly  foi  the  faitli  delivered 
to  -the  saints."  If  he  is  sent  of  God,  as  he  professes  to  be,  as  a  faith- 
ful watchman  on  Zion's  walls,  he  should  not  remain  mute ;  but  cry 
aloud,  seeing  his  opinions  have  been  politely  assailed.     Percontator." 

Answer.^-Many  reasons  might  be  imagined  for  bishop  Otey's  si- 
lence, but  I  will  venture  upon  only  one,  viz.  that  like  M.  de  La  MotUs 
(I  presume  the  witty  and  pious  bishop  of  Amiens)  he  is  waiting  for  a 
reply  to  his  silence.     How,  &c. 

Again — Mr.  Lancellot  Bell,  addressing  the  editor,  Mr.  Campbell 
(yid.  Mil.  Harbinger,  p.  570.)  says  "I  accompanied  brother  L.  to 
Cavetown,  where  he  addressed  the  citizens,  &c.  Two  of  the  "  called 
and  sent"  of  the  German  Reformed  church,  considering,  I  suppose, 
their  "  craft  in  danger,"  came  to  the  place,  and  I  spoke  against  these 
things,  contradicting,  who  were  going — to  express  it  in  the  language 
of  some  of  the  people,  to  "lick  us  up  like  salt,"  &c.  &c. 

Mr.  Campbell,  therefore,  has  changed  his  tone;  he  is  now  in  favor 
of  orders ;  dnd  this  change  has  apparently  taken  place  within  a  few 
days. 

I  have  proved  that  the  headship  of  t'^e  church  was  no  new  thing 
in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century.  Du  Pin  spoke  of  the  decision 
of  the  council  of  Nice,  respecting  the  contest  between  the  bishops 
of  Alexandria  and  of  Rome,  but  said  that  this  decision  of  the  council 
did  not  disprove  the  primacy  of  Rome,  so  that  this  doctrine  is  at  least 
as  old  as  the  year  318,  when  Sylvester  of  Rome  presided  by  his 
legate  Osius  of  Cordova  at  the  council  of  Nice.  This  shows  that  the 
authority  of  Rome  was  then  recognized.  He  spoke  of  the  council  of 
Chalcedon.  I  have  here  an  authentic  historian  recognized  by  the  Ca- 
tholics, and  one  who  tells  sharp  truths  of  individual  Catholics,  when 
he  conceives  them  to  be  in  the  wrong.  It  is  Barronius.  In  his  Annals, 
year  of  Christ  451,  of  pope  Leo,  12th,  twenty  seventh  of  Valentine  and 
2nd  of  Marcian,  he  says  that  in  this  council  the  authority  of  the  see 
of  Peter  was  recognized.  360  bishops  met  in  this  council.  Circum- 
stances not  permitting  pope  Leo  to  assist  at  it  in  person,  he  sent  three 
legates,  two  bishops  and  a  priest,  to  preside  in  his  -name.  At  the  first 
session  Paschasinus,  bishop  of  Lillibeum,  and  one  of  the  legates  of  the 
pope,  preferred  charges  against  Dioscorus,  patriarch  of  Alexandria,  for 
his  uncanonical  conduct  in  the  conventicle  of  Ephesus. 

Dioscorus,  thus  accused  and  convicted,  was  compelled  to  leave  his 
seat  and  sit  in  an  inferior, place  in  the  middle  of  the  assembly.  Sub- 
sequently a  sentence  of  deposition  was  pronounced  against  him ;  and 
as  his  guilt  was  manifest,  he  left  the  assembly  and  appeared  no  more. 
The  fathers  of  the  council  unanimously  exclaimed  that  the  doctrinal 
decisions  of  Leo  were  those  of  Peter  himself — "  Petrus  per  Leonem 
locutus  est" — Peter  hath  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  Leo.  (vid.  Reeves, 
1st  vol.  263.)  the  fathers  of  the  council  directed  to  St.  Leo  a  synodical 
letter,  in  which  they  acknowledge  him  for  the  interpreter  of  St.  Peter, 
for  their  head  and  guide."  (vid.  Barronius,  ibid.)  Now  here  is  the  au- 
thority of  the  first  general  council  of  Nice,  as  quoted  by  Labbe. 
Greek  bishops  say  : 

COUNCII5. 
"  The  Roman  church  has  always  had  the  primacy."     (Labbp,  t.  2.  p.  41.) 
The  second  general  council  and  first  of  Constantinople  says : 
"  F^et  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  have  the  first  siiare  of  honor  after  the  bisb 
op  of  Rome."     (Alexandria  was  eaiitled  to  the  secona  rank.) 


ROMAK    CATHOLIC    EELIGION.  35 

The  third  general  council  of  Ephesus  says: 

"  St.  Fcter,  tiie  prince  and  head  ol'  the  apostles,  the  foundation  of  the  Catholic 
church,  received  tiie  keys  of  the  kingdom  from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
power  of  loosing  and  of  binding  sin  was  given  to  him,  which  to  the  present 
time,  as  it  ever  has  done,  subsists  and  exercises  judgment  in  his  successors." 

Tlie  fourth  general  council  of  Chalcedon,  writing'  to  St.  Leo,  says : 
"  VVe  therefore  entreat  you,  to  honor  our  judgment  by  your  decrees;  and  as  we 

have  adhered  to  our  head  in  good  things,  so  let  your  supremacy  supply  what 

becometh  (or  is  wanting)  for  thy  children." 

The  council  of  Florence  in  which  the  Greek  and  Latin  bishops  were 
present,  thus  speaks : 

"  We  deSne  that  the  holy  apostolic  see  and  the  Roman  pontiff  hold  the  prima- 
cy over  the  entire  earth,  and  that  he  is  the  successor  of  the  blessed  Peter,  the 
prince  of  the  apostles,  the  true  vicar  of  Christ,  and  the  head  of  the  whole  church,' 
fee.     T.  13.  p.  515.  _ 

The  general  council  of  Trent,  speaks  in  the  following  terms : 

.  "The  sovereign  pontirts,  in  virtue  of  tlie  supreme  power  delivered  to  them 
over  the  entire  church,  had  a  rig-ht  to  reserve  the  judgment  of  certain  more 
grievous  crimes  to  their  own  tribunal." 

Melanclhon  holds  the  following  language,  as  quoted  by  Bossuet  in 
his  history  of  the  variations.  L.  5,  n.  24. 

"Our  people  agree,  that  the  ecclesiastical  polity,  in  which  are  recognized 
superior  bishops  of  many  churches  and  the  bishop  of  Rome  superior  to  all  bish- 
ops, is  permitted.  Thus  there  is  uo  contest  respecting  the  supremacy  of  the 
[rope  and  the  authority  of  bishops,  and  also  the  pope  and  the  bishops  could  rasi- 
y  preserve  this  authority,  for  it  is  necessary  for  a  church  to  have  leaders  to 
mamtain  order,  to  keep  an  eye  upon  those  called  to  the  ecclesiastical  state,  and 
upon  the  doctrine  of  the  priests,  and  to  exercise  ecclesiastical  judgment,  so  that 
if  there  were  no  bishops  we  would  have  to  make  them.  The  monarchy  of  the 
pope  would  also  serve  much  to  preserve  amongst  many  nations  the  unity  of 
doctrine;  wherefore  we  could  easily  agree  as  to  the  supremacy  of  the  pope  if  we 
could  agree  in  every  thingelse." 

Tjeibnitz,  as  quoted  by  De  Starck,  p.  22,  speaks  as  follows: 

"  As  God  is  the  God  of  order,  and  as  by  divine  appointment,  the  body  of  the 
only,  apostolic.  Catholic  church  can  be  maintained  by  a  single,  hierarchical  and 
universal  government,  it  follows,  that  there  must  be  a  supreme  spiritual  chief, 
who  shall  be  confined  within  proper  bounds,  established  by  the  same  (divine) 
right,  and  invested  with  all  the  power  and  dictatorial  authority  necessary  for 
the  preservation  of  the  church." 

FATHERS. 

St.  Irenseus  of  Lyons,  the  disciple  of  St.  Polycarp,  who  himself  ap- 
pears to  have  been  consecrated  by  St.  John  the  Evangelist,  repeatedly 
urges  this  argument  against  his  contemporary  heretics.     He  say  s  : 

"  We  can  count  up  those  who  were  appointed  bishops  in  the  churches  by 
ihe  apostles  and  their  successors  down  to  us,  none  of  whom  taught  this  doctrine. 
But  as  it  would  be  tedious  to  enumerate  the  succession  of  bishops  in  the  differ- 
ent churches,  we  refer  you  to  the  tradition  of  that  greatest,  most  ancient,  and 
universally  known  church,  founded  at  Rome  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  and 
which  has  been  preserved  there  through  the  succession  of  its  bishops,  down  to 
the  present  time." 

Tertullian,  who  also  flourished  in  the  same  century  (year  150),  ?irguea 
in  the  same  manner  and  challenges  certain  heretics  in  these  teims  ; 

'Let  them  produce  the  origin  of  their  churcli;  let  them  display  the  succession 
of  their  bisliops,  so  that  tlie  first  of  them  may  appear  to  have  been  ordained  by 
an  apostolic  man,  who  persevered  in  their  communion." 

St.  Athanasius  wnrites  to  St.  Felix,  the  Roman  Pontiff: 

"For  this  purpose  Christ  placed  you  and  your  predecessors  to  guide  the  ark 
and  to  have  the  care  of  all  the  churches,  that  vou  niav  help  us." 

St.  Cyprian,  in  his  55th  Epistle,  holds  the  following  language : 
"They  dare  to  sail  and  carry  letters  to  the  chair  of  Peter  and  the  principal 
church,  whence  sacerdotal  unity  proceeds." 


36  DEBATE    ON    TI£J5 

St.  Augustin,  who  wrote  in  the  fifth  century,  inenuons  thefnlnwinc 
among  other  motives  of  credibility  in  favor  of  the  Catholic  rehgiou. 

"There  are.  uianj'  other  things  which  keep  me  iu  the  bosoui  oi  th^;  C.iiiiulic 
church.  The  agreement  of  dirferent  people  and  nations  keeps  me  there.  Tlit 
authority  established  by  miracles,  nourished  by  hope,  increased  by  charity,  and 
confirmed  bj-  antiquity,  keeps  me  there.  The  succession  of  bishops  in  tiie  see  of 
St.  Peter,  the  apostle  (to  whom  our  Lord  after  his  resurrection,  comniilted  hig 
sheep  to  be  fed)  down  to  the  present  bishop,  keep  me  there.  Finally  tiie  very 
name  of  Catholic  which,  among  so  many  heresies,  this  church  alone  possesses, 
keeps  me  there." 

St.  Jerome  in  his  4th  Epistle  to  pope  Damasus  says: 

"  i,  following;  no  leader  but  Christ,  am  in  communion  with  }  our  holiness,  tliat 
is,  with  the  chair  of  Peter.  Whoever  gathereth  not  with  3011  gcatttitth,  that  is, 
whoever  is  not  of  Christ  is  of  anti-Christ." 

This  is,  in  substance,  the  testimony  of  the  bishops  throughout  the 
world,  in  every  age  to  the  present  time. — [Time  expired.] 

Pour  o'clock.,  P.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

On  the  subject  of  the  emendation  of  the  term  Roman  Catholic,  by 

Erefixiifg  tlie  word  English,  &c.,  I  am  willing  that  my  friend  should 
ave  all  the  advantage  to  be  derived  from  that  explanation.  I  am 
willing  that  he  should  appear  before  the  public  with  that  explanation, 
if  he  thinks  it  can  help  the  matter.  On  the  same  principle  he  may 
say  the  Philadelphia  Pittsburg  church  of  Cincinnati.  The  church, 
I  argued,  had  no  mortal  head  for  six  hundred  years.  He  certainly 
could  not  have  understood  me  as  denying  that  Christ  was  the  head 
of  his  church!  I  admit  that  Christ  is  the  immortal  head  of  the  church 
which  is  his  body,  and  Christ  is  her  only  head.  Christ's  church  re- 
quires a  living  and  omnipresent  head.  She  needs  not  two  heads,  for 
her  head  is  the  head  of  all  principality  and  power.  Can  the  pope  be 
omnipresent,  keeping  order  in  all  his  dominions  1 

I  was  surprised  at  the  gentleman's  hypothesis,  that  if  I  argued  that 
the  church  had  no  visible  and  human  head  for  six  hundred  years,  I 
then  asserted  that  Christ  was  not  the  head  of  his  church.  I  spoke 
not  of  Christ,  but  of  the  great  hierarch  on  earth,  who  claims  to  be  the 
fountain  of  all  power  and  authority  in  the  church.  Could  he  not 
understand  me  1 

The  gentleman  says,  that  the  Catholics  are  as  free  as  others.  I  ask 
have  they  the  same  liberty  to  read  the  Bible,  to  think  and  act  for 
themselves,  as  have  the  Protestants  ?  I  am  sorry  that  he  seemed  to 
take  advantage  of  my  acknowledging  myself  a  friend  to  bishops  and 
deacons  in  the  church.  In  my  enumeration  of  the  different  orders,  in 
the  present  Roman  church,  I  mentioned  .4rcA-bishops  and  ./?rcA-deacons  ; 
but  he  did  not  hear  me  say  bishops  and  deacons.  They  were  on  pur- 
pose left  out  of  that  enumeration,  that  I  might  noi  fall  into  the  error 
which  he  has  imagined  for  me. 

I  dispose  of  the  gentleman's  extract  from  the  Millennial  Harbinger 
and  of  his  learned  remarks  upon  them,  by  informing  him  that  he  has 
mistaken  the  writer:  I  am  not  the  author  of  the  article  in  question. 

Still  I  must  ask,  why  this  evasion  of  the  question  in  debate  ]  Why 
seek  to  excite  the  odium  theologicum,  on  account  of  some  distorted 
theory  unjustly  attributed  to  me— on  subjects,  too,  wholly  foreign  to 
this  debate  J  Are  these  the  weapons  by  which  my  learned  opponent 
is  compelled  to  defend  the  "  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches"  from 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELICrON.  37 

He  charge  of  unscriptural,  and  unfounded  assumptions  ?  Let  no  one 
imagrine,  however,  that  1  am  at  all  opposed  to  order  and  government 
m  the  church.  As  far  as  concerns  oversight,  or  the  having  of  bishops 
to  preside  over  the  flock,  I  am  an  Episcopalian.  I  am  for  having  pres- 
byters or  elders  in  every  church.  I  do  not  believe  in  a  church  without 
presbyters  or  bishops.  So  far  I  am  both  a  Presbyterian  and  an  Epis- 
copalian. 

On  the  subject  of  the  primacy  of  Rome,  the  gentleman  quoted  Bar* 
ronius,  and  snarled  at  Du  Pin.  Bu<  it  is  too  late  for  any  bishop  of 
'rlome,  or  of  England  to  stand  up  in  this  nineteenth  century  and  tell 
as  that  Du  Pin  is  not  an  authentic  historian.  My  friend  intimates 
that  the  certificates  in  the  preface  were  suborned.  What  a  charge  on 
the  learned  and  venerable  author  of  this  work ! 

[_Bishap  Purcell  here  said,  that  those  certificates  being  in  the  hdok  pro* 
ved  nothing ; — that  they  might  have  been  put  there  by  the  printer."] 

I  will  now  read  these  attestations  and  vouchers  that  you  may  judge 
how  gratuitous  are  the  objections  and  insinuations  of  the  bishop. 

THE  Al'PROBATION   OF  THE  DOCTORS   OF  THK  SORIiONNE. 
"The  whole  world  has  openly  declared   the  esteem   which  they  think  due  to 
the  J^ew  History  of  Ecclesiastical  Writers,  that  we  could  not  but  be  sensible 
of  the  complaisance  shewn  to  us,  since  the  judgment  we  bad  formed  of  it  was 
followed,  supported  and  authorized  by  that  t)f  the  public. 

"All  those  who  have  already  read  them,  will  here  find  what  will  recall  to  their 
memory  many  things  the}'  may  have  forgotten,  and  will  see  with  pleasure,  that 
our  author  has  reduced  their  doctrines  to  certain  principles,  by  which  they  show 
their  solidity  and  coherence.  Those  who  wish  to  read  them  will  here  meet 
with  what  will  save  them  much  time  and  trouble;  and  those  that  are  engaged  in 
that  long  and  wearisome  journey,  will  at  least  have  the  advantage  of  a  faithful 
and  experienced  guide,  who  will  lead  them  only  through  paths  equally  safe  and 
known.  Both  the  one  and  the  other  will  meet  with  a  piece  of  criticism  which 
is  always  clear,  prudent,  and  upright;  distinguishes  what  is  certain  from  tha* 
which  is  false  or  doubtful;  never  precipitates  the  judgment,  nor  lavs  down  sim- 
ple conjectures  in  place  of  demonstrative  proofs;  gives  to  every  thing  what  it 
merits,  purely  on  its  own  account  ;  and  the  better  to  attend  to  reason,  banishes 
all  prejudices  and  looks  at  nothing  in  its  search  after  truth,  but  truth  itself;  nor 
condemns,  only,  where  it  cannot  excuse. 

"Given  at  Paris,  August  18th,  1688. 

BLAMPIGNON,  Rector  of  St.  Merris. 
HIDEUX,  Rector  of  St.  Innocents." 

APPROBATION   OF  THE   ROYAL  CENSOR. 

"  By  the  order  of  my  lord  Chancellor;  I  have  read  a  book,  entitled  "A  History 
.of  the  churcit,  and  of  Ecclesiastical  Authors  in  the  sixteenth  century,"  by  Mes- 
sieur  Lewis  Ellies  Du  Pin,  Priest,  Doctor  of  Divinity  of  the  Faculty  of  Paris, 
and  Regius  Professor  of  Philosophy:  Containing  the  History  of  the  Church, 
»nd  of  ecclesiastical  Authors,  and  from  the  year  1550,  to  the  year  1600;  in 
which  I  find  nothing  to  hinder  its  being  printed. 
"Given  this  13th  day  of  January,  1703. 

BLAMPIGXON,  Curate  of  St.  Merris." 

APPROBATION  OF  THE  DOCTORS  OF  DIVINITY  OF  THE  FACULTY  OF  PARIS. 

"  We  whose  names  are  under  written.  Doctors  of  Divinity  of  the  Faculty  of 
Divinitv  of  Paris,  certify,  that  we  have  examined  a  book,  entitled  "A  History 
of  the  Church,  and  of  ecclesiastical  Authors,  in  the  sixteenth  centurj- ;"  by  Mes- 
sieur  Lewis  Ellies  Du  Pin,  Priest,  Doctor  of  Divinity  of  the  Faculty  or  Paris, 
and  Regius  Professor  of  Philosophy  :  and  that  we  have  found  nothing  therein 
contrarv  to  the  Catholic  faith,  or  to  good  manners.  In  assurance  whereof,  w« 
have  set  our  hands  this  20th  day  of  January,  1703. 

BLAMPIGNON,  Curate  of  St.  Merris 
HIDEUX,  Curate  of  St.  Innocents." 
D 


38  DEBATE    ON    THE 

I  put  it  now  to  the  good  sense  of  my  audience,  whether  such  testi- 
monies are  to  be  set  aside,  by  saying  that  the  printer  may  have  forgfid 
or  printed  them  on  his  own  responsibility. 

The  divine  warrant  for  the  primacy  of  the  pope  is  not  the  question 
on  which  the  gentleman  read  from  Barronius.  There  are  two  things 
in  every  history, — the  statement  of  facts,  and  the  comment  on  those 
facts.  The  opinion  of  the  historian  is  like  the  opinion  of  the  reader ; 
but  the  facts  stated  are  common  property ;  and  these  are  the  proper 
materials  of  his  work.  Barronius  does  not,  however,  on  the  point  in 
debate,  state  a  fad  contrary  to  Du  Pin.  There  were,  indeed,  prima- 
cies at  Alexandria,  Antioch,  Rome,  Constantinople,  Jerusalem.  But 
the  primacy  of  a.  metropolitan,  and  the  doctrine  of  an  universal  pri- 
macy over  all  metropolitans  at  any  one  place,  is  a  differen"  matter.  I 
coul^  not  understand  in  what  sense  he  meant  to  be  understood  when 
he  said  Gregory  could  not  go  for  primacy  in  "  that  sense."  Was 
there  a  peculiar  mysterious  meaning  attached  to  the  claim  or  title 
which  Gregory  reprobated  1  It  has  not  been  proved  that  any  contem- 
porary understood  it  so.  I  affirm  that  there  was  not  an  intelligent 
Catholic  of  that  day  who  understood  the  title  of  universal  patriarch, 
in  any  other  sense  than  that  in  which,  it  is  understood  among  us  now. 
The  person  first  established  in  the  primacy  of  Rome  exercised  a  uni- 
versal superintendency  over  the  church  exactly  similar  to  that  first 
claimed  by  the  bishop  of  Constantinople. 

My  friend  says,  '  the  author  from  whom  he  read  you  states  the  fact 
of  such  a  primacy  early  in  the  Roman  Church.'  If  we  examine  the 
authority  we  shall  see,  it  is  nothing  but  the  opinion  of  a  fallible  man; 
and  that  opinion  contrary  to  all  ancient  history.  I  affirm  that  there 
is  no  ecclesiastical  historian  of  authority,  who  attests  the  fact,  which 
he  is  desirous  to  prove.  It  is  one  thing  to  state  a  fact,  as  a  liistorian. 
and  another  to  state  an  opinion  or  commentary  on  a  fact.  The  ques- 
tion before  us,  is  not  the  metropolitan  primacy  of  Rome,  or  Antioch, 
or  Alexandria ;  but  the  universal  primacy  of  the  whole  church  ! 

I  admit,  as  to  the  council  of  Nice,  what  it  was  said  Du  Pin  asser- 
ted, viz.  '  that  the  sixth  canon  does  not  deny  the  primacy  of  Rome.' 
But  Du  Pin  goes  further, — (and  why  did  not  the  gentleman  read  all  ' 
that  Du  Pin  asserts  I)  I  read  it  all.  I  told  the  whole  truth  respect- 
ing it — the  gentleman  Kas  told  you  but  the  half  of  it — Du  Pin  says 
"  this  canon  does  not  preclude  the  idea :"  but  "  neither,''^  says  he,  ^^doea 
it  establish  it."  I  am  for  quoting  the  whole  authority.  Du  Pin,  as  a 
Catholic,  was  endeavoring  to  find  some  authority  for  supporting  the 
antiquity  of  the  primacy  of  the  see  of  Rome.  He  is  examining  the 
canons  of  the  council  carefully,  and  he  says  that  though  this  canon 
does  not  preclude  the  primacy,  "vet  neither  does  it  establish  it." 
It  afforded  him  nothing  for  or  against  it.  And  what  other  decree  oi 
council  did  establish  it  ] !  That  is  a  secret  the  bishop  will  never 
reveal.  •  ' 

Let  us  now  return  to  my  argument.  I  left  off  at  the  year  750,  and 
was  in  pursuit  of  the  day,  when  the  present  church  of  Rom.e  began. 
I  hasten  to  establish  it. 

It  would  be  both  tedious  and  unnecessary  to  read,  or  narrate  the 
Quarrels  between  Nicholas  of  Rome  and  Photius  of  Constantinople, 
on  the  vital  question  who  shall  be  the  greatest  1  which  greatly  pre- 
pared the  way  for  the  grand  schism.  We  have  not  time  for  this,  as 
ve  are  now,  before  we  sit  down,  to  give  you  the  day  and  date  of  the 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  69 

separation  of  the  Roman  church  from  the  Greek  church,  which  must 
be  regarded  as  the  day  of  her  separate  existence,  when  she  became 
what  she  now  is,  a  schism,  or  sect. 

There  was  a  violent  contest  between  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople 
and  the  patriarch  of  Rome,  or  pope,  if  you  please,  (for  I  state  em- 
phattcally,  that  the  idea  of  a  supreme  head  of  the  church  had  never 
been  digested  in  the  east,  and  though  the  eastern  church  may  have 
submitted,  or  acquiesced  for  the  time  being,  she  never  did  consent  to 
it).  The  promotion  of  the  layman  Photius,  gifted  and  splendid  aa 
he  was,  to  the  primacy  of  Constantinople,  greatly  vexed  his  holiness 
of  Rome.  Indeed,  from  the  time  of  Victor,  bishop  of  Rome,  A.  D. 
197,  who  assumed  to  exercise  jurisdiction  out  of  his  proper  diocese, 
in  respect  to  the  observance  of  Easter,  there  never  was  a  cordial  feel- 
ing of  unity,  or  co-operation  between  the  eastern  and  western  por- 
tions of  the  church.  The  arrogance  of  Victor,  called  for  strong  ex- 
pressions of  insubordination  on  the  part  of  the  Asiatic  brethren,  who 
claimed  for  themselves  as  much  license  to  dictate  to  the  western,  as 
he  had  to  the  eastern  church. 

The  "  Catholic"  body  was  not  yet  divided  into  two  great  masses. 
Photius  had  charge  of  the  church  of  Constantinople.  Nicholas  of 
Rome  was  indignant  that  a  layman  should  hold  the  high  d»p;nity  of 
patriarch  of  the  eastern  church,  however  the  emperor  and  tbo  church 
might  think.  To  make  matters  worse,  they  excommunic  I'ed  each 
other,  which  laid  the  foundation  of  dissentious  and  bad  feeli"  /  »,  which 
to  this  very  day,  never  have  been  atoned.  For  the  jealoufiv,'.  and  ri- 
valries of  these  two  bishops  never  slumbered  nor  slept,  till  '/.r  church 
was  divided  into  what  have  since  been  called  the  Greek  ■■nf\  Latin 
churches.  All  historians,  give  substantially  the  sameacconrt  of  this 
matter.     I  will  read  an  extract  or  two  from  Du  Pin. 

"Thoug'li  the  Latin  and  Greek  churches  were  not  in  close  coniinunton  with  each 
other  ever  since  the  aliair  of  Photius,  yet  they  did  not  proceed  to  an  open  rujj- 
ture  till  the  time  of  pope  />eo  IX.  and  oi Michael  Cerularius,  patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople. This  breach  began  by  a  letter  which  the  latter  wrote  in  the  yeai 
1053,  in  his  own  name,  and  in  the  name  of  Leo  archbishop  of  Acridia  and  of 
all  Bulgaria,  to  John  bishop  of  Trani  in  Apulia,  that  he  might  communicate  it 
to  the  pope  and  to  all  the  western  church.  In  this  letter  they  reproved  the  LmI- 
ins,  (1)  Because  they  made  use  of  unleavened  bread  in  the  celebration  of  the 
eocharist.  (2)  Because  they  fasted  on  .Sa/«rday*  in  Z,en<.  (3)  Because  they 
eat  the  blood  of  beasts,  and  things  stranjiled.  (4)  Because  they  did  not  sing 
Mllehdah  in  Lent."  &r.  &<•.     Vol.  ii.  p.  234. 

The  patriarch  of  Constantinople  first  anathematized  Leo  IX.  ec- 
clesiastically cursed  him  and  his  party,  and  this  may  have  pro^-oked 
severer  measures  against  the  Greeks  than  were  at  first  contemplated 
by  the  Latins.  It  is,  however,  an  important  fact,  that  the  Greeks  were 
the  first  excommunicators. 

The  pope  of  Rome  sent  three  legates  to  Constantinople,  under  pre- 
tence of  healing  the  divisions  and  strifes  existing,  who  had,  secretly 
In  their  pockets,  a  bull  of  excommunication  against  the  patriarch  and 
his  party.  They  were  instructed  to  exhort  him  to  yield ;  but  if  they 
found  him  incorrigible,  they  were  to  fulminate  against  hi  i  the  dread 
anathema.  After  a  fruitless  attempt  to  bring  over  the  patriarch  by 
mild  means,  they  entered  the  church  of  St.  Sophia,  at  noon  day,  on 
the  IGth  of  .July,  in  the  year  1054,  and  mounting  the  altar  read  aloud 
the  bull  of  excommunication,  before  the  people,  find  then  departed, 
ehaking  off  the  dust  ot  their  feet  against  the  patrldich,  his  city  and 
people.     The  bull  speal  s  on  this  wise : 


40  DBBATE    ON    THE 

"  The  Holy  Apostolic  see  of  Rome,  which  is  the  chief  of  the  whole  world, 
to  which  as  to  the  head  belongs  in  a  more  especial  manner  the  tare  of  all  the 
churches;  has  s(  iit  us  to  this  royal  city  in  the  quality  of  its  legates,  for  the  welfare 
and  peace  of  the  church,  that  as  it  is  written,  we  should  go  down  and  see  whe- 
ther the  cries  which  pierce  its  ears  from  this  great  city  be  tru-s  or  no. 

Let  therefore  the  emperors,  clergy,  senate  and  people  of  this  city  of  Constan- 
tinople know,  that  we  nave  here  found  more  good  to  excite  our  joy,  than  evil 
to  raise  our  sorrow.  For  as  to  the  supporters  of  the  empire,  and  the  principal 
citizens,  the  city  is  wholly  christian  and  orthodox:  but  as  for  Michael,  who 
took  upon  him  the  false  title  of  patriarch,  and  his  adherents,  we  hav« 
found  that  they  have  sown  discord  and  heresy  in  the  midst  of  this  city  * 
*  *  because  they  rebaptized,  as  did  the  Arians,  those  who  had  been  bap 
tized  in  the  name  of  the  blessed  trinity,  and  particularly  the  Latins;  because 
with  the  Donatiiis  they  maintain  that  the  Greek  church  is  the  only  true  church, 
and  that  the  sacrijices  and  baptism  of  none  else  are  valid." 

The  Greek  church,  be  it  noted  with  all  distinctness,  did  stand  upon 
this  point,  that  she  was  the  only  true  church ;  and  that  no  ordinance^ 
baptism  or  the  eucharist.  was  at  all  valid,  unless  administered  by  her  aw 
thority. 

I  will  read  a  little  further  : 

"  Michael  having  been  advertized  of  these  errors"  &c.  &c.  "  refused  to  appear 
before,  or  to  have  any  conference  with  us,  and  has  likewise  lorb;id  our  entrance 
into  the  churches  to  perform  divine  service  therein  forasmuch  as  he  had  for- 
merly shut  up  the  churches  of  the  Latins,  calling  them  Azymitce,  persecuting 
and  excommunicating  them,  all  whieh  reflected  on  the  holy  see,  in  contempt 
whereof  he  styled  himself  (Ecumenical  or  Universal  Patriarch.  Where- 
fore not  being  able  any  longer  to  tolerate  such  an  unheard  of  abuse  as  was  of- 
fered to  the  holy  apostolical  see,  and  looking  upon  it  as  a  violation  of  the  Ca- 
tholic faith  in  several  instances,  &.C.,  "  We  do  subscribe  to  the  anathema  which 
our  most  holy  father  the  pope  has  denounced  against  Michael  and  his  adhe- 
rents, if  they  do  not  retract  their  errors."  &;c.     Id.  ib.  p.  236. 

If  then,  there  be  any  truth  in  history,  from  that  day  the  present 
sect  of  the  church  of  Rome  began  its  existence. 

It  never  was  fully,  or  cordially  conceded  by  the  Greek  church,  that 
the  pope  was,  or  ought  to  be,  the  universal  father ;  and  it  may  be 
affirmed  in  all  truth,  that  this  was  the  real  cause  of  the  schism. 

To  recapitulate,  thus  far,  in  seeking  for  the  papal  head,  so  essen- 
tial to  the  Roman  church,  we  find  it  not  in  the  New  Testament,  in 
the  ancient  fathers,  in  the  canons  of  the  first  general  councils,  nor  in 
the  history  of  the  church,  till  the  commencement  of  the  seventh  cen- 
tury. On  the  authority  of  Barronius,  it  is  said  that  Phocas  gave  the 
title  to. Boniface  the  3rd  in  the  year  606.  We  have  also  seen,  that 
Pepin,  another  usurper,  gave  temporal  estates  and  political  dominion 
to  the  popes  about  the  middle  of  the  8th  century,  and  that  on  the  16th 
of  July  1054  the  Western  or  Roman  half  of  the  church,  after  having- 
been  first  anathematized  by  the  Eastern  or  Greek  half,  did  solemnly 
separate  itself  from  the  communion  of  the  Greek  church  by  an 
anathema.  Hence,  both  the  origin  and  the  name  of  the  church  of 
Rome. — [Time  expired.] 

Half-past  4  o^lock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Pi  icell  rises — 

My  friend  Mr.  Campbell  has  fought  a  noble  battle  for  me.  I  shall- 
prove  that  presently.  C  ibbon  was  an  infidel,  and  became  so  be- 
cause his  father  would  not  allow  him  to  embrace  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic faith.  He  was  a  prodigy  of  mind,  and  his  intellect  was  so 
precocious  that  even  when  only  sixteen  years  old,  he  read,  I  think 


KOJtAJr   CATHOLIC    RELIGIOJT.  41 

it  was,  Bossuet's  Universal  History,  by  which  he  was  convinced  of 
the  truth  of  the  Catholic  religion.  His  father  (sad  proof  of  the  re- 
straints on  liberty  of  conscience,  as  exemplified  in  Protestant  commu- 
nities) persecuted  him  for  this,  and  sent  him  to  Lausanne,  in  Switzer- 
land, where,  under  the  close  surveillance  of  Pavillard  a  Calvinist 
minister,  he  was  confined,  debarred  the  reading  of  Catholic  books, 
and  fed  on  bread  and  water,  till  at  last  he  yielded  his  creed  for  better 
fare.  He  thus  became  an  infidel,  and  wrote  against  all  religions. 
But  a  man  who  could  thus  shrink  from  duty  to  that  faith  which  he 
believed  true,  because  he  was  persecuted,  was  not  fit  to  appreciate  the 
beauty  of  the  religion  that  had  attracted  him  ;  nor  the  sublime  testi- 
mony rendered  to  its  divinity  by  its  martyrs'  blood.  If  he  could 
thus  prove  recreant  to  the  only  one  which  he  loved,  no  wonder  he  be- 
came opposed  to  all. 

Such  are  the  authorities  against  which  I  have  to  militate. 

The  gentleman  told  us  that  he  would  put  his  finger  upon  the  precise 
day  and  date,  as  recorded  in  history,  when  the  Roman  church  separa- 
ted fromr  the  holy  and  ancient  apostolic  church,  but  he  has  not  kept  his 
word.  I  warrant  that  that  pledge  will  never  be  redeemed.  (Mr. 
Campbell  here  explained  that  he  had  fixed  it  at  the  16th  July,  1054.) 
If  then  the  Catholic  church  ceased  to  be  the  true  church  in  1054, 
where  was  the  church  of  Christ]  Where  was  the  true  Catholic  church, 
from  which  the  Roman  Catholic  church  separated  %  "  Behold  I  am 
ALWAYS  with  you,"  says  Christ,  "  and  I  will  send  you  another  Para- 
clete who  will  abide  with  you  all  days."     Matth.  xxviii,  20. 

If  the  true  church  was  no  where — if  Christ  had  no  witness  on  earth, 
his  promises  have  failed  ;  and  Revelation  is  a  solecism.  A  church, 
unless  it  be  conspicuous,  unless  every  enquirer  can  have  access  to  it. 
is  of  no  use  as  a  witness  of  truth  to  mankind.  If  hid,  how  can  it 
testify  of  the  true  doctrine  of  Christ  to  all  nations  1  But  mark  the 
.splendid  testimony  in  favor  of  the  purity  and  watchfulness  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  church,  aflTorded  by  history.  How  did  the  schism 
of  the  Greek  church  begin  1  A  layman  Photius  intruded  and  de- 
clared himself  the  head  of  the  church.  This  single  fact  is  a  splendid 
argument  of  itself,  to  prove  the  necessity  of  a  supreme  head  to  watch 
over  the  church.  To  use  a  Scriptural  phrase,  he  was  like  a  faithful 
sentinel  upon  the  walls  of  Zion,  to  sound  the  warning  to  the  world, 
or,  if  you  will,  not  to  resemble  "a  dumb  dog,"  but  to  bark  at  the  approach 
of  the  thief,  who  came  not  in  at  the  gate,  but  came  by  another  way 
into  the  fold, and  he  did  bark  at  him  ;  and  Photius  and  Michael  Ceru- 
larius  and  other  Greek  intruders  and  errorists,  not  content  with  as- 
suming a  power  not  belonging  to  them,  actually  cursed  and  anathe- 
matized the  pope  of  Rome,  a  proof  perhaps  of  the  amiable  character 
the  gentleman  gives  the  enemies  of  order  and  of  the  pope,  but  a  suf- 
ficient reason  why  the  pope  should  exert  all  his  authority  in  protect- 
ing the  church  from  their  usurpations. 

liut  the  three  legates  to  whom  the  commission  was  entrusted,  car- 
ried the  bull  of  excommunication  in  their  pockets,  and  they  are  made 
to  appear  very  treacherous  because  they  did  not  produce  it  at  once, 
but  tried  by  pacific  measures  to  bring  about  a  reconciliation.  Is  it  in 
the  gentleman's  estimation,  then,  an  evidence  of  treachery,  to  resor'  t:^ 
persuasive  means  with  an  enemy,  before  appealing  to  the  sword  and 
involving  one's  country  in  war?  Suppose  the  president  of  the  United 
States  sends  a  minister  to  a  foreign  country  to  obtain  the  settlement 


42  DEBATE   ON   THE 

of  a  disputed  question.  Does  that  minister  begin  bj"  declaring  war, 
by  forcing  his  proposal  with  a  bayonet  down  the  throats  of  the  peo- 
ple to  whom  he  is  accredited  1  No,  he  tries  every  mild  means  first. 
The  contrary  course  would  be  neither  politic  nor  wise,  neither  humane 
nor  in  accordance  with  the  rules  of  civilized  society.  The  great  and 
the  peculiar  character  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  is  neither 
to  provoke  nor  to  brook  aggression.  If  her  rights  are  violated,  she 
endeavors  to  convince  the  violator  of  his  injustice,  to  disabuse  him 
of  his  error,  to  win  him  back  to  a  sense  of  rectitude  by  persuasion 
and  just  remonstrance.  If  this  fails,  she  resorts  to  arms,  and  though 
she  loves  peace  she  is  prepared  for  war.  In  a  word  she  is  terribly 
peaceful.  Now  mark  the  course  of  the  legates.  They  entreat  Michael 
to  reconsider  his  conduct,  they  urge  every  argument  that  zeal  can  sug 
gest,  but  finding  all  their  efforts  fruitless,  they  aftferwards  act  in  pur 
suance  of  their  instructions,  with  perfect  ingenuousness  and  openness 
Observe  their  procedure.  They  eiscend  the  altar  of  the  great  church 
of  St.  Sophia,  the  seventh  wonder  of  the  world — at  whose  portals 
stood  that  large  vase  for  the  holy  water,  wherewith  Greeks*  and  Ro- 
mans, commemorating  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  by  which 
our  consciences  are  purified  from  dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God, 
were  accustomed  alike  to  bless  tfoemsel  ves ;  and  on  which  were  in- 
scribed the  Greek  words  ^^NiTra-ovAn/xn/xsLroLfJtu/ucvati-liv"  "  purify  O 
God,  our  transgressions,  and  not  our  countenance  only."  They  went 
on  the  altar  and  in  a  formal  speech  explained  to  the  assembled  multi- 
tude what  were  the  grounds  of  the  anathema.  The  crime  of  Mi- 
chael was  that  in  defiance  of  the  prohibitions  both  of  the  old  and  new 
law,  he  had  made  eunuchs  priests.  He  was  also  accused  of  Arian- 
ism.  Now  the  Arians  deny  the  divinity  of  Christ — I  have  heard 
from  some  of  our  most  respectable  citizens,  that  Mr.  Campbell  also 
denies  that  cardinal  dogma,  but  I  do  not  vouch  for  the  correctness  of 
their  assertion.  (Mr.  Campbell  here  stated  that  he  did  not  deny  the 
divinity  of  Christ.) 

It  appears  pretty  plain  from  history  that  the  people  were  for  the 
legates  and  opposed  to  their  own  usurping  archbishop.  Why?  "The 
legates  flattered  them."  But  how  1  So  far  from  it  their  whole  argument 
was  directed  against  a  man  living  amongst  this  very  people,  and  for 
an  individual  far  distant.  It  is  natural  to  suppose  that  the  people 
were  prejudiced  in  favor  of  their  own  archbishop  and  against  one  who 
was  a  stranger  to  them.  In  short,  were  they  not  speaking  against  the 
primacy  and  the  assumptions  of  the  ecclesiastical  dignitary  of  the 
very  church  in  which  they  spoke,  andof  the  very  people  to  whom  they 
spoke.  Did  they  flatter  the  clergy  ?  no ;  they  strongly  inveighed 
against  the  unscriptural  and  uncanonical  ordination  of  the  odious  eu- 
nuchs, by  whom  the  patriarch  was  surrounded.  This  was  a  fine  il- 
lustration of  the  zeal  for  sound  doctrine  and  discipline,  displayed  in 
every  previous  and  subsequent  age  by  the  holy  see.  It  was  acting 
on  the  apostolic  maxim — It  is  better  to  obey  God  than  man — That 
duties  are  ours  and  consequences  are  God's. 

"  Oh  Timothy,  guard  the  deposit"  (of  faith)  said  St.  Paul. 

"J\ow  the  spirit  iiianifeslly  saith,  that  in  the  last  tini<s,  some  shall  depart 
iVoni  the  faith,  giving  heed  to  spirits  o(  error,  speaking  lies  in  hypocrisv,  having 
their  consciences  seared  with  a  red  hot  iron.  These  things  proposing  to  the 
brethren  thou  shalt  be  a  good  minister  of  Jesus  Christ,  uourished  up  in  tli« 
words  of  the  faith  and  of  the  good  doctrine,  whereuoto  thou  hast  attained  " — 
1st  Kp.  tc  Tiiu.  ch.  iv.  v.  1.  2.  6. 


SOMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGIOTf.  43 

Thus  on  this  occasion  did  the  pope. 

My  friend  could  not  understand  in  what  sense  the  patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople claimed  the  title  of  universal  bishop;  and  wanted  to  learn 
how  his  claim  differed  from  the  present  understanding  of  the  office. 
He  has  the  answer  in  this  history  of  facts.  He  has,  or  his  authority 
Du  Pin  has  for  him,  admitted  that  this  Michael  had  said  in  effiect  that 
he  was  Lord  God  over  all  the  earth:  and  that  there  was  no  authority 
without  his  sanction  for  any  officer  of  the  church  to  perform  any  of 
the  ordinances  of  religion.  Even  the  pope  of  Rome  must  crouch  to 
his  feet  before  he  could  administer  the  eucharist  or  even  baptize  an 
infant.  And  the  historian  says  that  the  document  accusing  the  arch- 
bishop was  read  before  the  people  of  Constantinople — the  very  city 
where  he  reigned,  where  he  was  known,  and  where  all  the  facts  of 
the  case  were  before  them.  What  is  the  most  natural  supposition  1 
Surely  this ;  that  if  that  document  had  not  been  true  the  people  would 
have  cried  out  against  it ; — they  would  not  have  assented  to  it.  So 
that  all  this  is  a  splendid  triumph  of  the  supremacy  of  the  Roman  see. 
But  why  refer  to  particular  instances,  when  ecclesiastical  history  is 
full  of  appeals  made  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  by  all  the  other  bishops 
of  Christendom,  and  all  acquiescing  in  his  decision  as  not  only  the  de- 
cision of  Peter,  but  of  Christ  himself.  "The  extraordinary  commis- 
sion given  to  Paul,"  says  Bossuet, "  expired  with  him  in  Rome,  an  J 
blending  with  the  authority  of  Peter,  to  which  it  was  subordinate, 
raised  the  Roman  see  to  the  height  of  authority  and  glory.  This  is 
the  church  which,  taught  by  Peter  and  his  successors,  has  never  been 
infected  with  heresy.  This  power  of  binding  and  loosing  from  sin, 
was  given  first  to  Peter  and  then  to  the  rest  of  the  twelve  apostles. 
For  it  was  manifestly  the  design  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  place  first  in  one 
what  he  afterwards  intended  to  confer  on  many,  but  the  sequel  impairs 
not  the  commencement,  nor  does  the  first  lose  his  place.  All  receive 
the  same  power  from  the  same  source,  but  not  all  in  the  same  degree, 
nor  to  the  same  extent,  for  Jesus  Christ  communicates  himself  as  he 
pleases,  and  always  in  the  manner  best  calculated  to  establish  the  uni- 
ty of  the  church."  "  Peter,"  says  St.  Augustin,  "  who,  in  the  honor 
of  his  primacy,  represented  the  entire  church,  first  and  alone,  receives 
the  keys,  which  were  next  to  be  communicated  to  all  the  others."  The 
reason  of  this  is  assigned  by  St.  Casarius  of  Aries,  that  the  ecclesiastical 
authority,  first  established  in  a  single  bishop,  and  afterwards  diff"used 
among  many,  may  be  forever  brought  back  to  the  principle  of  unity, 
and  remain  inseparably  united  in  the  same  chair.  This  is  the  Roman 
chaii,  the  chair  of  Peter  so  much  celebrated  by  the  Fathers,  in  which 
they  vied  with  one  another  in  extolling  the  principality  of  the  apostolic 
chair,  the  principal  principality,  the  source  of  unity,  the  mother 
church,  the  head  ^or  centre)  of  the  episcopacy,  whence  parts  the  ray  of 
government,  the  chief,  the  only  see  which  bindeth  all  in  unity." 

hi  these  words  you  hear  Ootatus,  St.  Augustin,  St.  Cyprian,  St. 
Irenaeus,  St.  Prosper,  St.  Avitus,  Theodoret,  the  council  ofChalcedon, 
Africa  and  Gaul,  Greece  and  Asia,  the  east  and  the  west  united  toge- 
ther. This  is  the  doctrine  of  all  the  church  ;  this  is  its  unity  and 
strength.  Here  all  is  strong  because  all  is  divine,  all  is  united.  And 
as  each  part  is  divine,  the  bond  also  is  divine,  and  the  union  and 
arrangement  such  that  each  member  acts  with  the  force  of  the  entire 
body.     Hence  whilst  the  ancient  bishops  said,  they  exercised  author* 


44  DEBATE    ON    THE 

'ty  in  their  respective  churches  as  the  vicars  of  Jesus  Christ  and  suot 
cessors  of  the  apostles  sent  immediately  by  him,  they  also  declared 
that  they  acted  in  the  name  of  Peter  in  virtue  of  the  authority  given  to 
all  bishops  in  the  person  of  Peter ;  so  that  the  correspondence,  the 
union  and  harmony  of  the  entire  body  of  the  church  are  such  that  what 
one  bishop  does,  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  and  rules  of  Catholic 
unity,  all  the  church,  all  the  Episcopacy,  and  the  chief  of  the  Episco- 
pacy act  in  concert  and  accomplish  with  him. 

My  friend  observes  that  the  Greeks  were  always  uneasy  under  the 
Roman  popedom.  I  admit  this  to  a  great  extent,  but  St.  .Tohn,  and 
Polycarp,  and  Ignatius  and  Irenaeus  (his  name  signif.es  Peace,  or  the 
peaceful)  and  Eusebius  and  Chrysostom  and  a  hundred  ethers  were 
Greeks,  and  the  most  eloquent  advocates,  and  the  ablest  supporters  of 
the  preeminence  of  the  church  of  Rome  above  all  other  churches. 

Here  then  is  a  cloud  of  witnesses  who  furnish  an  astonishing  mass 
of  testimony  to  th«  fact  that  in  the  early  days,  the  Greek  church  as 
well  as  the  Latin  submitted  willingly  to  the  authority  of  St.  Peter  and 
his  successors — the  authority  necessary  to  preserve  order  and  peace 
»nd  unity,  &c.  in  the  church  of  God  on  earth. 

With  regard  to  the  controversy  of  the  gentleman  with  Bishop  Otey  ; 
there  was  a  mooted  point  between  Mr.  Campbell  and  himself.  I  un- 
derstood however  that  all  the  discussion  was  on  Mr.  Campbell's  side. 

(Mr.  Campbell  here  explained  that  he  had  had  a  private  discussion 
with  Bishop  Otey,  and  had  afterwards  written  him  seven  letters  upon 
the  Episcopacy.) 

Bishop  Purcell.  I  really  do  not  know  what  Mr.  Campbell's  tenets 
are,  or  what  he  believes.  My  brethren,  I  am  fighting  in  the  dark.  I  am 
obliged  to  answer  on  the  spot  charges  and  objections  against  my  re- 
ligion which  I  cannot  anticipate,  while  I  really  know  not  what  my 
antagonist's  belief  is,  what  qualifications,  what  marks  of  a  divine  call 
to  the  ministry  he  considers  necessary,  if  indeed  he  believes  in  any 
peculiar  separation  of  any  man  or  set  of  men,  for  priestly  functions. 

Will  my  friend  say  definitely,  before  this  assembly,  if  he  believe  in 
the  necessity  of  such  call  or  mission. 

Mr.  Campbell.  I  do. 

Bishop  Purcell.  How  is  that  calling  made  known,  that  mission 
given? 

Mr.  Campbell.  By  the  word  and  providence  of  God. 

Bishop  Purcell.  How  can  we  ascertain  that  word  and  providence 
of  God  ! 

Mr.  Campbell.  By  the  voice  of  the  people  and  the  written  word — 
*'vox  populi  vox  Dei." 

Bishop  Purcell.  Suppose  the  people  are  displeased,  for  instance, 
with  a  Presbyterian  pastor,  have  they  the  sole  power  to  remove  him? 

Mr.  Campbell.  Yes. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Suppose  the  ministry  of  a  Presbyterian  church 
are  displeased  with  him,  and  the  people  of  his  church  are  pleased  with 
him.     May  he  then  retain  his  station  against  the  will  of  the  ministry? 

Mr.  Campbell.  If  the  people  will  have  it  so,  it  must  be  so.  "  Vex 
populi,  vox  Dei"! 

Bishop  ruRCELL.  There  my  brethren,  you  have  heard  himi  Suth 
declarations  ! 


SOMAN    CATHOLIC    KElIGIOR.  4d 


SATURDAY,  January  14th.,  Half  past  9  o'clock,  A.  M. 

Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

I  shall  resume  the  subject  where  I  closed  yesterday  evening,  reserv- 
ing my  remarks  on  the  last  speech  of  my  opponent  till  the  conclusion 
of  my  prespnt  argument. 

The  gentleman  read  in  the  various  reasons  assigned  for  the  bull  of 
Nicholas,  against  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople  and  his  brethren, 
among  others,  the  statement  that  the  Greeks  pretended  to  be  the  only 
true,  catholic  and  apostolic  church.  It  would  not  be  difficult  to  prove 
from  history  that  in  point  of  seniority,  the  Greek  church  has  a  superior 
claim  to  the  Roman.  It  is  first  in  point  of  time,  and  claims  a  regular 
descent  from  the  apostles.  There  is  one  strong  argument  in  her  favor 
which  never  has  been  met.  To  her  belong  the  first  seven  councils. 
They  were  held  in  Grecian  cities,  called  by  Grecian  emperors,  and 
composed  of  Grecian  bishops.  They  were  wholly  Grecian.  The  Ro- 
man church  has  no  right  to  claim  them.  And  if  the  doctrines  proclaim- 
ed hy  these  councils  be  true,  they  are  the  doctrines  of  the  Greek  church 
subsequently  borrowed  by  the  Romans. 

As  this  is  an  important  point,  I  will  expatiate  a  little  more  fully  up- 
on it.  I  have  taken  the  trouble  to  collect  the  following  facts:  at  the 
first  council  of  Nice  there  were  318  bishops:  of  these  315  were  Greek 
and  3  Roman.  This  was  the  first  general  council,  A.  D.  325.  At  the 
first  council  of  Constantinople,  (the  second  general  council  of  the 
church,)  A.  D.  381.  there  were  150bishops  ;  of  these  149  were  Greeks, 
and  only  1  was  Roman.  At  the  third  council  held  at  Ephesus,  A.  D. 
431,  there  were  but  68  bishops  present.  Of  these  67  were  Greek,  and 
one  was  Roman.  At  the  fourth  general  council,  which  was  the  largest 
and  most  authoritative  of  the  first  four,  held  at  Chalcedon  A.  D.  451, 
against  Rutyches,  there  were  present  353  bishops:  350  of  whom  were 
Greeks,  and  only  3  Roman.  At  the  second  council  of  Consta  itinople 
(^Xhe fifth  general  council)  there  were  present  164  bishops:  156  of 
whom  were  Greeks,  and  6  Romans — held  against  Origen  and  others, 
A.  D.  553.  At  the  third  council  of  Constantinople,  {zndthe  sixth  gen- 
eral council,)  there  were  56  bishops  present :  51  of  whom  were  Greeks, 
and  5  Romans.  This  council  met  against  the  Monothelites  A.  D  680. 
At  the  second  council  of  Nice,  (the  seventh  general  council.)  there 
were  present  377  bishops;  370  of  whom  were  Greeks,  and  7  Romans. 
Th?y  met  to  restore  images,  A.  D.  787.  These  were  the  first  seven 
general  councils  of  the  church.  I  have  been  at  the  pains  to  make  this 
collection  of  facts,  to  ascertain  the  merits  of  the  controversy  between 
th-*.  Greek  and  Roman  sects,  as  respects  the  question  to  whom  of 
right  belong  the  doctrines  of  the  ancient  councils.  I  find  that  the 
whole  number  of  bishops  in  these  councils  was  1486 :  only  26  of 
whom  were  Romans.  Certainly  the  Greek  church  has  the  prior  claim 
on  our  attention,  and  ought  to  be  revered  for  her  antiquity  and  author- 
ity, more  than  the  schism  which  haughtily  separated  from  her  I 

But,  in  addition  to  these  councils  having  been  called — not  by  the 
authority  of  the  chuich  of  Rome  :  but  by  eastern  emperors,  and  coav 
posed  of  eastern  bishops ;  every  great  question  discussed  in  the  first 
four ;  and,  indeed,  I  may  add,  in  the  last  three  councils,  was  of  Gre- 


46  DEBATE   ON   THE 

cian  origin.  They  grew  up  in  the  Greek  school — a  school  easily  dis- 
tinguished from  the  Latin,  by  the  peculiar  subtiliy  of  its  definitions — 
a  school  long  accustomed  to  nice  distinctions,  and  whose  reasoners 
could  split  the  thousandth  part  of  an  idea.  Of  this,  their  wars  about 
homousios  and  homoousios  are  ample  proof.  There  are  no  questions 
more  purely  abstract  and  metaphysical  than  many  of  those  discussed 
in  these  seven  great  ecumenical  councils. 

Again,  these  councils  were  not  only  called  by  Greeks,  composed  of 
Greeks,  and  occupied  about  Greek  questions;  but  were  all  assemhled 
in  Grecian  cities. 

If  there  be  any  virtue  in  councils  to  establish  doctrines  and  the  prior 
ity  of  churches,  the  Greek  church  must  be  considered  the  mother  of 
the  Roman,  rather  than  her  daughter.  At  all  events,  it  is  fully  proved 
that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  is  a  sect  or  schism,  which  is  the  bur- 
then of  the  proposition  before  us.  To  strengthen  this  conviction,  I 
proceed  to  comment  on  a  standard  definition  of  Catholicity. 

I  would  now  ask  if  there  be  any  objection  to  the.  book  which  I  hold  in 
my  hand,  as  a  good  Roman  Catholic  authority.  I  believe  it  to  be  the 
true  standard  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church.  It  is  " /Ae  doctrine  of 
the  council  of  Treiit,  as  expressed  ifi  the  creed  of  poj>e  Pius  the  iv."  Bui 
while  the  word  "catholic"  is  in  my  eye,  I  am  reminded  that  my 
friend  has  asserted,  '  that  catholic  is  a  scripture  title  of  the  church.'  1 
reply  that  it  is  not  so  used  in  the  New  Testament ;  and  that  it  is  only 
found  as  a  general,  running  title  to  some  epistles :  that  its  antiquity  is 
very  doubtful,  as  it  cannot  be  found  in  the  body  of  the  book  ;  and,  con- 
sequently, it  has  no  authority.  But  now  for  the  definition  from  the 
approved  standard  of  the  church  : 

Section  IV.  Under  the  head,  "  That  the  church  of  Christ  is  Catholic  or 
UmversA'.,"  it  is  asked, 

What  do  ynn  understand  hy  this  7 

Jlnswer.  'Not  only  that  the  church  of  Christ  shali  aiways  be  known  by  the 
name  of  Catholic,  by  which  she  is  called  in  the  creed;  but  that  she  shali  also 
be  truly  Catholic  or  Universal  by  being  the  church  of  all  ag-es  and  nations." 
p.  15. 

We  have  been  showing  that  the  church  of  Christ  was  not  originally 
known  by  the  name  catholic ;  that  the  Roman  sent  was  not  the  church 
of  the  first  six  centuries ;  and,  therefore,  that  the  approved  definition 
of  the  creed  will  not  apply  to  this  party.  I  have  proved  that  she  had 
no  pope,  or  supreme  head,  for  full  six  hundred  years,  and  in  corrobora 
tion  of  the  argument,  drawn  from  general  councils,  I  have  shown  thai 
the  first  seven  were  not  hers,  but  peculiarly  those  of  the  Greek  church; 
and  that  the  Greek  church  is,  in  fact,  the  mother. 

But  there  are  yet  other,  and  perhaps  stronger  arguments  to  show 
her  daughtership.  Some  of  my  audience  can  appreciate  the  following* 
That  the  Hebrew  is  a  more  ancient  language  than  the  Greek,  and  the 
Greek  than  the  Roman,  needs  not  be  stated  but  for  a  few.  One  proof 
of  this  fact  is,  that  the  Hebrew  has  given  many  words  to  the  Greek, 
while  the  Greek  has  given  none  to  the  Hebrew  So  the  Greek  has 
given  many  words  to  the  Latin,  while  the  Latin  has  given  none  to  the 
Greek.  Thus  we  prove  the  Roman  church  to  have  come  out  of  the 
bosom  of  the  Greek,  from  the  fact,  that  all  the  leading  ecclesiastical 
Jerms  in  the  Roman  church  are  Greek.  For  example:  ^^ pope,"  "patri- 
arch" '^ synod"  "ecclesiastic"  "schism"  "schismatic,"  "heresy,"  "here- 
tic," " hf^fsiarch"  "catechumen,"  "hierarchy,"  "church"  "chrism," 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGIO.  47 

"erwcrarj,"  ^^akolutht,^^  "diocess,"  ^'presbytery"  "trinity,"  ^'mystery,^ 
"/n^5.'»e,"  ''■catholic"  "canon"  &c.,  &c.,  &c.  This  as  fully  proves 
the  seniority  of  the  Greek  church,  as  it  does  that  of  the  Greek  lan- 
guage over   he  Latin. 

All  ancient  ecclesiastical  historians,  are  also  Greeks,  such  as  Euse- 
bius,  Socrates  Scholasticus,  Evagrius  Scholasticus,  Sozomon,  Theo- 
doret.  The  most  ancient  and  primitive  fathers  are  also  Greek.  They 
were  models  to  the  Latins  and  imitated  in  their  writings. 

To  recapitulate,  we  have  now  shown  that  the  Greek  church  is  more 
ancient  than  the  Latin  church  ;  because  the  first  seven  generaLpouncils 
were  all  Greek,  there  being  1486  Grecian  bishops  and  only  26  Roman 
bishops  present,  they  were  called  by  Greek  emperors,  held  in  Greek 
cities,  and  employed  about  Greek  questions. 

The  leading  ecclesiastic  terms  of  all  the  ancient  offices,  customs 
and  controversies,  are  Greek  :  So  are  the  early  fathers  and  historians. 

These  considerations  superadded  to  the  facts  and  documents  of  yes- 
terday, we  think  fully  prove  that  the  Roman  church  is  not  the  church 
of  all  ages  and  of  all  nations — not  the  catholic  and  apostolic  church,  as 
the  creed  of  Trent  defines ;  but  a  sect,  a  branch  or  schism,  from  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  churches  of  the  New  Testament. 

In  proving  the  proposition  before  us  my  plan  is  to  select  one  of  the 
grand  elements  embraced  in  the  standard  definition  of  the  church,  and 
to  show  that  such  being  essential  to  the  church,  the  church  could  not 
exist  without  it.  Now,  I  prefer  the  arithmetical  rnode  of  procedure  in 
this  discussion.  First  lay  down  the  rule  and  work  a  single  question, 
and  then  leave  it  to  others  to  work  as  many  as  they  please. 

Thus  I  first  laid  down  a  definition  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church 
from  her  own  standards.  From  that  it  appeared  that  a  pope  or  univer- 
sal bishop  is  an  essential  element  of  her  existence.  1  then  showed  that 
six  hundred  years  had  elapsed  from  the  time  of  the  apostles,  before  the 
doctrine  or  existence  of  a  universal  bishop  was  thought  of,  and  that  the 
office  was  not  instituted  till  the  year  606.  But  when  I  have  proved 
this,  I  have  worked  only  one  question.  Any  one  may  take  up  the  doc- 
trine of  transubstantiation,  the  worship  of  images,  purgatory,  (a  doc- 
trine more  ancient  however,  than  either  the  Greek  or  Roman  church,) 
and  every  other  peculiar  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  and 
prove  that  not  one  of  them  is  to  be  found  in  the  divine  book,  nor  in  the 
records  of  the  church. 

"What,  let  me  now  ask,  is  the  great  point  in  my  first  proposition  1 
To  prove  that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  is  not  "  the  mother  and  mis^ 
tress"  of  all  churches  ;  but  a  sect,  in  the  full  import  of  that  word ;  ani 
if  that  be  not  now  proved,  I  know  not  what  can  be  proved.  I  admit 
the  subject  is  capable  of  much  more  extensive  developement  ;  but  we 
think  it  neither  necessary  nor  expedient  to  be  more  diffuse. 

Will  the  presiding  moderator  please  read  my  first  proposition  ? 

[Here  proposition  No.  1.   was  read  by  the  moderator.] 

I  say  then  she  is  not  the  holy,  apostolic,  catholic  church,  as  she  pre- 
tends to  be  ;  for  in  proving  her  to  be  a  sect,  I  prove  her  to  be  not  catho- 
lic, nor  apostolic;  because  the  true  apostolic  church  cannot  be  called  ti 
tect.  To  prove  her  to  be  a  sect  is  to  prove  her  not  Catholic,  therefore, 
nor  apostolic.  What  remains  now?  Even  on  the  concession  of  my 
opponent,  she  is  not  the  Catholic  church  ;  for  he  ailmits,  that  the  Greek 
thurch  differed  from  her  only  in  a  few  non-essential  matters.     On  that 


48  DEBATE    ON    THE 

admission,  if  he  admits  that  persons  are  saved  in  the  Greek  church  i 
she  must  be  a  part  of  the  church  of  Christ ;  for  with  him,  there  is  nc 
saivation  out  of  the  church. 

In  the  next  place  my  proposition  says  '  she  is  not  holy.''  I  am  im- 
pelled by  a  sense  of  duty,  and  not  by  any  unkind  feelings  towards  such 
of  my  fellow  citizens  as  belong  to  that  community,  to  attempt  to  prove 
that  the  church  of  Rome  is  not  holy.  I  would  not  heedlessly  or  need- 
lessly offend  a^rainst  the  feelings  of  an  Indian,  a  Hindoo,  or  a  Pagan, 
in  his  sincere  devotions,  how  absurd  soever  they  might  be.  Much  less 
would  I^wound  any  one  that  professes  the  christian  religion  under  any 
form;  but  in  serving  my  contemporaries,  in  redeeming  my  pledge,  i 
has  become  necessary  to  investigate  the  grand  pretensions  of  this  fra 
ternity,  that  exclusively  arrogates  to  itself  the  title  oiholy. 

Not  to  expatiate  at  (his  time  on  the  vices  of  the  clergy  and  of  the  popes 
what  the  cardinals  Barronius  and  Bellarmine  have  so  fully  noticed,  and 
sometimes  gpecially  detailed,  I  shall  take  a  single  text  from  Bellar- 
mine, De.  Eccl.  lib.  3.  c.  7.  which  avows  a  doctrine  that  must  for 
ever  make  the  Roman  church  unholy.  It  is  expressed  in  these 
words : — 

"  Wicked  men,  infidels  and  reprobates  remaining-  in  the  public  profession  of 
the  Romish  church  are  tnie  members  of  the  body  of  Christ." 

How  then  can  we  admit  that  she  is  holy  ?  Again  :  it  must  be  ad- 
mitted that  the  great  mass  of  all  those  who  die  in  the  faith  and  profes- 
sion of  the  Catholic  doctrines  are  not  strictly  holy  ;  for  why  then  should 
they  have  to  pass  through  the  fires  of  purgatory  ] 

But  again  ;  in  her  own  Testament  (if  she  have  a  Testament.  The 
gentleman  may,  indeed  tell  us  his  church  has  no  English  Testament  ; 
for  she  never  owned  but  the  Vulgate.  She  never  gave  to  her  people, 
with  approbation  a  French,  or  English,  or  any  vernacular  Testament 
The  Rhemish  Testament  is,  however,  published  by  the  authority  of  a 
portion  of  the  church;  and  from  it  we  can  find  the  doctrine  of  Bellar- 
mine explicitly  taught  in  the  notes  appended,  by  the  same  authority 
which  gave  the  Testament)  in  her  own  Testament,  I  repeat  it,  on  John 
Jtv.  1.  these  Roman  annotators  say  : — 

"  Every  branch  in  me,  &c."  Christ  hath  some  branches  in  his  body  mystical 
that  be  fruitless;  therefore,  ill  livers  also  mav  he  members  of  Christ's  church.'" 

"Ill  livers"  (mark  it)  "  may  be  members."  This  is  repeatedly  sta- 
ted in  various  |)laces,  and  as  T  understand,  avowed  by  all  that  commu 
uity,  as  the  true  doctrine  of  the  church.  "  111  /f'rers,"  wicked  men,  in- 
fidels, reprobates,  vicious  characters,  those  guilty  of  crimes  of  every 
enormity  and  color,  may  then  continue  member^'  of  the  Roman  church, 
while  they  acknowledge  the  pope  and  the  priesthood,  and  make  profes 
sion  of  faith  in  the  Catholic  church  ;  she  therefore  counts  within  hei 
fold  150,000,000  of  souls,  as  my  opponent  stated  in  this  city  in  Octobei 
last.  All  that  happen  to  be  born  in  Catholic  countries,  infidels,  athe- 
ists, and  all,  are  enrolled  in  her  communion.  Her  gates  are  wide  as 
the  human  race.  It  is  all  church  and  no  world  with  her.  The  lusts  of 
the  flesh,  the  lust  of  the  eyes,  and  the  pride  of  life,  are  found  in  her 
communion. 

The  Roman  Catholics  in  the  United  States  are  probably  the  best  body 
of  Catholics  in  the  world.  I  mean  those  who  are  native  citizens.  But 
visit  Old  Spain  or  New  Spain,  Portugal,  Italy,  Austria,  France,  or  Can- 
ada, where  Catholicism  is  the  established  religion  ;  and  then  ask  whe- 
ther holiRess  be  a  distinguishing  attribute  of  the  depraved  and  degraded 


KOMAN    CATHOLIC    HELICION.  49 

millions  who  call  themselves  Roman  Catholics!  This  with  me  is  no 
very  pleasant  theme,  and  I  will  not  extend  my  remarks  on  this  point  by 
unnecessary  details.  I  have  sSid  enough  to  prove  the  allegata  in  my 
first  proposition,  and  to  show  that  the  church  of  Rome  is  a  sect  and  not 
the  holy,  apostolic  church  of  Christ,  as  she  proudly  and  exclusively 
pretends.  I  am  willing  to  submit  these  documents  to  the  severest  in- 
vestigation ;  and  if  other  arguments  and  facts  are  called  for,  I  will  only 
add,  we  have  them  at  command. 

My  learned  opponent  seems  to  imagine  that  when  I  fix  the  birth  day 
of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  on  the  16th  day  of  July  1054,  I  must 
admit  that  the  church  from  which  she  separated  was  the  true  and  uncor- 
rupted  church  of  Christ ;  but  this  is  what  logicians  call  a  nonsequitur. 
It  does  not  follow.  The  gentleman  seems  to  reason  as  if  it  were  inva- 
riable that  when  one  sect  separates  from  another,  the  body  from  which 
it  separates,  must  necessarily  be  the  true  church.  This  is  not  logical. 
A  new  sect  may  spring  from  the  bosom  of  the  worst  sect  on  earth ; 
but  does  this  prove  that  the  mother  sect  has  piety,  character,  or  author- 
ity ■?  Neither  does  it  follow  that  in  the  year  1054  the  Greek  church, 
though  the  mother  or  sisterof  the  Roman,  was  the  true  church  of  Christ. 
When  it  becomes  necessary,  I  may  show  that  both  the  Greek  and  Ro- 
man schisms  had  long  before  1054,  been  separate  from  the  apostolic 
church. 

Protestants  have  all  conceded  too  much  in  every  age  and  period  of 
this  controversy.  Even  now  there  is  a  morbid  sensibility  upon  this 
subject  among  some,  lest  we  should  make  Christ's  church  too  indepen- 
dent of  the  pope's  church.  '  In  reproaching  the  mother  church,'  say 
they,  "  you  reproach  us,  also." 

In  one  of  the  periodicals  of  this  morning  it  was  intimated  that  the 
fates  and  fortunes  of  some  Protestant  party  are  involved  in  the  pending 
controversy.  Be  not  afraid  of  the  insinuations  of  such  political  alarm- 
ists. I  stand  here  as  a  Protestant,  not  as  a  Baptist,  or  Methodist,  or 
Episcopalian  ;  but  to  defend  Protestantism.  I  am  not  afraid  to  meet 
any  antagonist  on  these  premises.  In  advocating  the  great  cardinal 
principles  of  Protestantism,  I  feel  that  I  stand  upon  a  rock.  There  is 
nothftig  in  hazard.  I  am  sorry  to  see  this  sort  of  sensibility  manifest- 
ed.    Can  the  truth  suffer  from  discussion  1 

In  the  mean  time  I  will  proceed  to  the  second  proposition,  which  will 
much  illustrate  and  confirm  the  argument  already  offered  in  proof  of 
the  first.  These  great  points  so  embrace  one  another,  and  are  so  in- 
timately allied,  that  none  of  them  can  be  fully  demonstrated  without  re- 
ference to  the  others. 

"Prop.  II.  Her  notion  of  Apostolic  Succession  is  without  any  foundation  in 
the  Bible,  in  reason,  or  in  fart  ;  an  imposition  of  the  most  injurious  consequen- 
ces, built  upon  unscriptural  and  anti-scriptural  traditions,  resting  wholly  upon 
the  cpinions  of  interested  and  fallible  men." 

Before  I  heard  that  the  bishop  intended  to  meet  me  in  debate,  I  had 
leaolved  to  deliver  a  series  of  lectures,  on  the  whole  pretensions  of  the 
Roman  Church,  in  the  following  order:  1st  her  apostolicity,  2nd  anti- 
quity, 3rd  infallibility,  4th  supremacy,  5th  catholicity,  6th  unity, 
and  7th  sanctity.  These  seven  great  topics,  I  intended  to  discuss  at 
full  length.  Each  involving  the  others,  none  of  them  is  so  isolated  as 
to  be  susceptible  of  an  independent  and  separate  developement.  The 
very  term  apostolicity  involves  antiquity:  hence,  we  find  her  pretending 
F.  4 


50  DEBATE    03V    THE 

to  trace  her  descent,  by  regular  steps,  back  to  Peter,  who,  she  assert*, 
was  the  first  bishop  of  Rome. 

"  Only  those  that  can  derive  their  lineage  from  the  apostles  are  the  heirs  of  the 
apostles:  and  consequently  they  alone  can  claim  a  right  to  the  scriptures,  to  the 
administration  of  the  sacraraenls,  or  any  share  in  the  pastoral  nunistry.  It  ia 
their  proper  inheritance  which  they  have  received  from  the  apostles,  and  the 
apostles  from  Christ.  *  As  my  father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  I  send  you.'"  John 
xs.  21.     [Grounds  of  Cath.  Doc.  p.  17. 

This  is  the  doctrine  of  the  creed  of  pope  Pius  it.  and  a  more  cflaring 
assumption  is  not  easily  imagined.  This  church,  however,  delights 
in  assumption.  She  assumes  that  Jesas  Christ  did  establish  a  church 
of  all  nations,  to  be  ruled  by  a  sort  of  generalissimo,  or  universal 
head,  who  was  to  be  his  vicar  oh  earth ;  by  virtue  of  whose  ecclesi- 
astical power  she  assumes  for  him  political  power ;  for  his  logic  is. 
that  Jesus  Christ's  vicar  must  represent  his  luaster  in  all  things,  in  his 
political  as  well  as  his  ecclesiastical  power.  And  as  Christ  himself 
possesses  all  authority  in  heaven  and  on'earth,  she  assumes  that  the 
pope  his  vicar  ought  to  be  the  fountain  of  all  power  :  that  by  hin> 
kings  should  reign,  and  princes  decree  justice.  After  having  thus  as- 
sumed, that  Christ  did  establish  such  a  kingdom  and  headship  on  earth, 
that  he  did  constitute  the  office  of  a  vicar  for  himself  and  of  a  prince  of 
the  apostles  ;  in  the  second  place,  she  assumes  that  this  headship  was 
given  to  Peter,  that  Christ  gave  the  whole  church  and  the  apostles 
themselves  in  charge  to  Peter  ;  that  he  gave  him  absolute  control  over 
the  bishops,  pastors  and  laity ;  and  in  the  third  place,  to  complete 
the  climax  of  assumptions,  she  assumes  that  Christ  established  a  suc- 
Cessorship  to  Peter  throughout  all  ages.  On  this  triple  assumption 
rests  the  colossal  empire  of  the  papacy. 

Now,  as  to  the  nature  of  the  apostolical  office  be  it  observed  with 
brevity,  that  it  was  essentially  incommunicable.  Holy  writ  recogni- 
zes but  three  orders  of  apostles,  and  none  of  them  had  lineal  succes- 
sors. Jesus  Christ,  the  apostle  of  God  the  Father,  was  the  first.  He 
is  called  in  the  New  Testament,  "  the  .Apostle  and  high  priest  of  the 
christian  professioni"  It  is  not  necessary  to  prove  that  he  could  have 
no  successor.  Second,  the  twelve  apostles,  who  were  apostles  of 
Christ,  as  he  was  the  apostle  of  God.  In  John  xvii.  he  says,  "As  njy 
Father  made  me  his  apostle,  so  I  make  you  my  apostles."  These  thet> 
being  personal  attendants  on  the  Messiah,  could  have  no  successors. 
TJiird,  Apostles  sent  out  by  particular  churches,  on  special  errands. 
TTheseare  called  in  the  New  Testament  o/  tt-TntrTcxoi  tui  ix*x»<7i«v.  These, 
always  sent  on  special  errands,  could  have  no  successors. 

If  the  qualifications  of  the  apostolic  office  were  understood,  there 
could  be  no  controversy  on  the  question  of  successors.  As  laid 
down  by  Peter,  Acts  i.  it  behoved  them  to  have  been  companions  of 
Christ  from  his  baptism  to  his  acsension,  to  be  eye  and  ear  witnesses 
of  all  that  he  did  and  said.  In  this  essential  requisite  they  could  have 
no  successors.  Besides,  if  one  should  have  a  successor,  why  not  all? 
While  the  college  of  apostles  was  necessary,  we  see  that  succession 
"'2S  fully  carried  out.  Therefore,  the  chair  of  Judas  the  traitor  deman- 
ded a  successor  as  well  as  that  of  Peter.  But  yet  we  have  not  heard 
of  any  controversy  about  the  successor  of  Judas! 

Our  first  argument  against  the  Catholic  notion  of  succession  is  drawi> 
from  the  r  "lure  ofilie  apostolic  office.  ■ 

H'xx.  did  we  concede  that  the  apostolic  office  was  communicable,  ant* 


EOSIAN    CATHOLIC    ftELIGION.  51 

lliat  Christ  did  appoint  a  president  of  the  apostles,  and  place  his  chair 
in  Rome,  there  is  no  document  on  earth,  from  which  we  can  learn  with 
any  degree  of  certainty,  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  in  Rome.  And  yet 
Catholics  themselves,  contend  that  it  is  essential  to  the  cause  cf  the 
succession  and  supremacy  that  Peter  placed  his  see  at  Rome  by  Christ's 
commandment. 

Bellarmine  positively  affirms ; 

"  The  right  ojf  succession  in  the  popes  of  Rome  isjbunded  in  this,  that  Peter 
by  Christ's  appointment,  placed  his  seat  at  Rome,  and  there  remained  till  hit 
■  death."     Lib.  ii.  c.  1. 

This  resolves  the  controversy  into  a  single  question  of  fact,  viz. 
Did  Ptler,  by  Chrtufs  appointment,  place  his  seat  at  Home  and  there  re- 
main  till  death  7     Barronius,  however  says; 

"  It  is  not  improbable  that  our  Lord  gave  an  express  command  that  Peter 
should  so  lix  his  see  at  Rome,  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  should  absolutelv  sue 
ceed  him.     [Id.  lb. 

Only  probable !  But  there  is  no  such  succession  in  fact.  In  the 
first  place,  there  is  no  proof  from  scripture  that  Peter  ever  was  at  Rome, 
much  less,  bishop  of  Rome  ;  and  secondly,  if  he  were  an  apostle,  he 
could  not  be  the  bishop  of  any  church.  A  king,  a  justice  of  the  peace, 
the  bi.shop  of  London,  the  vicar  of  Bray  !  It  is,  on  these  premises, 
impossible  to  prove  this  most  fundamental  question. 

Various  efforts  have  been  made  by  the  bishop  of  Cincinnati  to  ex- 
cite Episcopalians  and  others  on  this  question,  as  if  they  were  likely 
to  be  involved  in  the  same  common  ruin  with  my  opponent's  preten- 
sions. There  is  no  need  for  any  alarm  on  this  account.  The  office  of 
pope  and  his  succession,  certainly,  are  not  identical  with  that  of 
Episcopalian  bishops  in  England  or  America  ! 

There  is  no  body  cf  men  who  have  done  more  to  elevate  English 
Jterature  and  science,  than  the  English  clergy,  none  whose  writings 
I  have  read  with  more  pleasure  than  theirs,  on  all  subjects  pertaining 
to  general  literature,  morality  and  religion.  In  some  of  them,  indeed, 
we  find  weak  as  well  as  strong  places,  and  a  too  great  timidity  in 
contending  against  the  Romanists,  lest  they  should  endanger  their  right 
of  Episcopacy.  I  incline  to  the  opinion,  that  the  pretensions  of  the 
church  of  Rome  may  be  fully  canvassed  without  at  all  jeopardizing 
the  simple  question  of  the  divine  right  of  Episcopacy.  But  if  we  at- 
tempt to  bring  a  clean  thing  out  of  an  unclean  ;  or  expect  to  find  »  di- 
vine warrant  in  the  commission  given  to  the  apostles  ;  or  in  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  traditions  ;  we  shall  never  find  it  to  the  day  of  eternity. 

Successors  must  be  successors  in  full,  or  they  are  not  successors  at 
all.  To  illustrate  this — does  not  the  existing  president  of  the  United 
States  inhe.nt  all  the  power  and  authority  of  George  Washington,  by 
virtue  of  constitutional  succession  1  Does  he  not  possess  the  same 
Dower,  in  all. its  length  and  breadth,  its  height  and  depth,  as  dii  his 
predecessor,  from  the  first  to  the  last  1  This  is  true  of  every  constitu- 
tional office  in  the  civilized  world.  All  the  power  which  any  prede- 
cessor can  have,  belongs  to  every  incumbent  :  So  in  the  church  'f  it 
have  constitution  at  all. 

If  the  apostles  have  successors,  they  have  successors  in  full.  But 
the  Roman  Catholics  themselves  give  up  thecontroversy,  by  admitting 
that  none  of  the  bishops  or  popes  inherit  the  power  and  functions  be- 
stowed upon  the  apostles  by  the  commission. 

I  do  not,  indeed,  found  ray  argument  for  the  divine  right  of  bishop* 


b2  DEBATE    ON   THE 

or  elders,  and  deacons,  on  the  commission,  which  Jesus  Christ  gives 
to  his  apostles;  and  I  am  prepared  for  all  the  consequences  of  this  ad- 
mission. For  hy  every  rule  of  interpretation,  I  must  apply  every  word 
of  the  commission  to  the  apostles ;  because  it  addresses  them  only. 
But  let  none  he  alarmed  at  this  declaration  :  nothing  is  jeopardized — 
rather,  indeed,  all  is  secured  by  it.  , 

In  the  presence  of  the  apostles  alone,  he  pronounced  these  words ; 
"  All  authority  in  heaven  and  on  earth  is  given  to  me  ;  go  you  there- 
fore and  convert  all  the  nations,  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
the  things  which  I  have  commanded  you ;  and  lo,  /  am  with  you  al- 
ways, even  to  the  conclusion  of  this  state,"  or  to  the  end  of  the  age  or 
world. 

This  commission  created  plenipotentiaries  :  it  reared  up  ambassa- 
dors, and  gave  to  the  apostles  the  same  power  of  erecting  the  church, 
which  God  gave  to  Moses  for  raising  the  tabernacle  in  the  wilderness. 
They  had  all  the  authority  of  Christ  to  set  up  what  orders  they  pleas- 
ed. They  created  both  bishops  and  deacons  ;  and  as  thej'  had  a  di- 
vine right  to  do  so,  so  those  created  by  them  have  a  divine  right  to 
officiate  in  the  duties  of  those  offices.  A  true  interpretation  of  the 
promise,  "/am  with  you,^^  will  go  far  to  confirm  the  declaration,  that 
they  neither  had,  nor  could  have  successors  in  office.  Of  this,  how- 
ever, again — 

Meanwhile,  it  may  be  objected  that  Paul  was  an  apostle,  and  ac- 
ted without  this  commission.  He  had,  indeed,  a  special  commission, 
and  the  qualifications  of  an  apostle.  He  had  seen  and  heard  the  Lord. 
For  to  this  end  the  Lord  appeared  to  him.  jBut  as  respected  time,  he 
acknowledged  he  was  born  rather  two  late  to  be  an  apostle — he  was 
"  born  Old  of  due  time."  How,  then,  could  any  of  them  have  succes- 
sors at  this  day  ! 

The  gentleman  mentioned  some  two  persons  in  the  Old  Testament. 
They  could  have  no  successors  in  otHce,  according  to  the  argument  on 
hand.  It  was  absolutely  impossible  that  Moses  could  have  a  succes- 
sor. His  office  and  commission  were  really  from  God,  and  strictly 
peculiar  to  himself.  He  brought  the  Jews  out  of  Egypt,  and  erected 
the  tabernacle  ;  this  was  his  peculiar  office,  which,  in  its  very  nature, 
expired  when  once  its  duties  were  fulfilled.  The  commission  of  Joshua, 
in  ln»e  manner,  was  also  peculiar  to  himself,  and  could  not  possibly  de- 
scend to  a  successor.  When  he  led  Israel  across  the  Jordan,  and  di- 
vided the  land  by  lot  amongst  them,  his  works  and  office  naturally  ex- 
pired. So  when  the  apostles  preached  the  gospel,  revealed  the  whole 
will  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  erected  his  church  and  all  its  proper  officers 
and  duties,  their  work  was  done,  and  they,  like  Moses  and  Joshua,  be- 
ing officers  extraordinary,  could  have  no  successors.-[Time  expired.] 

Half  past  10  o  block  A.  M. 
Bishop  Purceli,  rises. 

Here  is,  beloved  friends,  as  plain  and  logical  a  case  for  argumenta- 
tion, and  as  fair  an  opportunity  afforded  for  refutation,  as  ever  the 
annals  of  controversy  exhibited.  The  first  argument  of  my  friend 
amounts  to  this,  viz :  That  for  reasons  he  has  ffiven,  the  Greek  church 
has  superior  claims  upon  our  attention  to  the  Roman. 

I  have  quoted  councils,  general  and  particular  laws,  usages,  appeals 


ROHAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  53 

the  authority  of  Greek  and  Latin  fathers,  that  is  to  say,  the  most  au- 
thentic testimony  of  the  first  figes,  to  show  that  with  Rome  was  the 
primacy  of  all  the  churches.     This,  at  once,  upsets  all  that  he  has  said. 

He  says  the  first  seven  councils  were  Greek;  and  that  therefore  the 
Greek  church  had  the  preeminence.  But,  I  ask,  who  convoked  those 
councils?-  Who  approved  tlieml  Who  sanctioned  their  canons,  and 
gave  throughout  the  entire  church  the  force  of  law  to  their  decisions  ? 
Who  guarded  them  against  errors,  and  set  them  right  when  they  were 
going,  or  had  gone  astray?  It  was  the  pope.  I  have  already  said, 
that  Sylvester,  hishop  of  Rome,  aware  of  the  danger  that  menaced  the 
faith  in  the  east,  convoked  the  great  council  of  Nice — that  the 
emperor  Constantine,  the  ruler  of  the  east  and  west,  of  Rome  and 
of  Constantinople,  the  man,  consequently,  upon  whom  as  chief  magis- 
trate of  the  Roman  empire  it  devolved,  afforded  the  necessary  facilities 
to  the  various  bishops  to  come  to  the  council.  Again,  who  presided 
as  legate  of  the  pope  1  Osius  of  Cordova,  in  Spain,  a  western  man, 
assisted,  as  is  and  has  been  customary,  by  two  inferior  ecclesiastics. 

The  jealous  Greeks  beheld  all  this,  and  surely  they  would  not  have 
permitted  Rome  thus  to  assume  the  supremacy,  if  her  right  to  it  had 
not  been  universally  admitted  since  the  days  of  her  founder  St.  Peter. 
Is  it  not  the  most  splendid  proof  of  the  correctness  of  my  argument? 
The  strongest  evidence  that  could  be  desired  of  the  discomfiture  of 
my  adversary? 

I  thought  to  have  seen  a  more  powerful  display  of  logic  from  the 
strong  and  disciplined  mind  of  my  friend  Mr.  C;  but  I  attributed  the 
poverty  of  his  argument  to  indisposition  on  his  part,  or  to  the  weak- 
ness of  his  cause. 

Well,  another  reason  is  stated,  to  prove  the  supremacy  of  the  Greek 
church,  viz. :  that  the  questions  discussed  in  these  councils  were  of 
Greek  origin.  Is  it  then  to  be  wondered  at,  that  as  almost  every  error 
in  the  old  church  originated  in  the  East,  it  should  be  there  corrected  ^ 
that  the  remedy  should  be  applied  where  the  disease  existed? 

The  Greeks  were  at  all  times  a  curious,  inquisitive,  restless  people. 
The  passion  for  disputation  displayed  in  the  schools  of  the  philosophers 
was,  as  by  contagion,  communicated  to  many  of  the  professors  of 
Christianity.  But  the  manner  in  which  it  operated  upon  the  one  and 
the  other  was  essentially  different.  With  the  philosopher  such  ques- 
tions were  objects  of  understanding  only,  subjects  of  speculation ; 
whereon  the  ingenuity  of  a  minute  mind  might  employ  or  waste  itself. 
But  with  the  christian  they  were  matters  of  truth  and  falsehood,  of 
belief  or  disbelief,  and  he  felt  assured  that  his  eternal  interests  would 
be  influenced  if  not  decided  by  his  choirce.  As  soon  as  the  copious 
language  of  Greece  was  vaguely  applied  to  the  definition  of  spiritual 
things,  aad  the  explanation  of  heavenly  mysteries,  the  field  of  conten- 
tion seemed  to  be  removed  from  earth  to  air,  where  the  foot  found 
nothing  stable  (nothing  like  the  rock  of  Rome — new  and  striking 
proof  of  its  necessity)  to  rest  upon ;  where  arguments  were  easily 
eluded,  and  where  the  space,  in  which  to  fly  and  rally,  was  infinite. 
Add  to  this  the  nature  and  genius  of  the  disputants;  for  the  origin  if 
these  disputes  may  be  traced  without  any  exception  to  the  rest/ess  imaging' 
tions  of  the  East.  The  violent  temperament  of  the  orientals,  as  it  w<s 
highly  adapted  to  the  reception  of  religious  impressions,  and  admittel^ 
them  with  fervor  and  earnestness,  intermingled,  so  closely,  passion 
If  -3 


54  DnBATK    ON    THE 

With  piety,  as  scarcely  to  conceive  them  separable.  TThe  natural  ardor 
of  their  feelings  was  not  abated  by  the  natural  subtilty  of  their  under- 
standing, which  was  sharpened  in  the  schools  of  Egypt;  and  when 
this  latter  began  to  be  occupied  by  inquiries  in  which  the  former  were 
so  deeply  engaged,  it  was  to  be  expected  that  many  extravagances 
would  follow.     Vid.  Waddington,  p.  92. 

Yet,  because  it  was  in  the  east  that  the  heresies  in  the  ancient  day 
of  the  church  commenced,  and  in  the  east  the  councils  met  to  correct 
those  heresies,  the  Greek  church  must  therefore  have  been  the  mother 
church!  Such  is  my  friend's  argument!  and  it  is  now  plain,  that  a 
feebler,  a  more  inconclusive,  and  a  more  irrational  one,  he  could  scarce- 
ly have  advanced  before  this  enlightened  assembly.  But  what  is  still 
more  remarkable,  did  not  these  very  councils,  these  Greek  councils, 
establish  by  their  own  acts,  and  these  of  the  most  solemn  and  authentic 
character,  the  supremacy  of  the  Roman  seel  Did  they  not  solicit  the 
pope's  approbation  of  their  decrees,  and  acknowledge  that  without  his 
sanction  their  proceedings  were  void  of  effectl 

He  says  that  the  emperor  presided.  I  have  already  answered  that 
tfie  emperor  did  not  preside.  He  distinctly  acknowledged  the  spiritual 
to  be  independent  of  the  temporal  power,  he  alleged  that  he  pretended 
to  no  right  to  preside.  He  knew  that  God  never  told  the  emperors, 
his  predecessors,  to  preside  over  the  deliberations  of  his  church.  The 
constitution  of  that  church  had  been  established  three  hundred  years 
before  Constantine  became  a  proselyte  to  Christianity.  It  is  unheara 
of  that  a  temporal  monarch  ever  presided  over  the  deliberations  of  the 
church,  or  ruled  in  ecclesiastical  matters.  At  least  we  catholics  submit 
to  no  such  dictation — such  a  confusion  of  things  divine  and  human — 
such  an  anomaly  !  I  am  sorry  it  is  allowed  in  England.  In  that  coun- 
try even  a  woman  may  be,  for  a  woman  has  been,  the  head  of  the 
church,  as  in  the  instance  of  queen  Elizabeth ;  nay,  a  little  child,  as 
in  the  case  of  Edward.  It  is  contrary  to  reason,  to  scripture,  to  human 
rights  and  divine  ordinances,  that  such  as  these  should  presume  in  any 
situations,  to  give  or  withhold  authority  to  the  ministry,  to  preach  th« 
gospel  of  Christ,  or  to  dispense  the  mysteries  of  God.  It  outragpt? 
every  feeling  of  sanctity,  it  degrades,  it  vilifies  the  priesthood,  to  sfte 
bishops  and  archbishops  kneeling  at  the  feet  of  women  and  boys,  and 
praying  them  to  grant  a  license  to  preach. 

My  friend  has  charged  me  with  making  professions  of  respect  for 
Episcopalians  and  Episcopal  methodists,  &c.,  but  do  I  suppress  the 
truth,  and  do  I  fail  to  censure  them  where  they  too  are  wrong.  My 
friend  has  gratuitously  presented  himself  before  this  assembly  as  the 
champion  of  Protestantism;  and  I  have  shown  that  he  is,  if  at  all,  but 
little  less  .opposed  than  I  am  to  the  denominations  I  have  named,  on 
the  vital  point  of  orders  and  a  called  and  sent  ministry.  He  would 
amuse  them  with  an  equivocal  defence  of  their  principles  to-day,  and 
then  present  them  with  his  own  views  in  theology — with  Campbell- 
ism,  baptized  Protestantism, — [Here  the  moderators  called  Bishop 
Purcell  to  order.] 

My  friend,  learnedly,  (and  I  give  him  credit  for  it.)  showed  how  it 
came  that  there  were  so  many  errors  and  questionable  doctrines  in  the 
Greek  church.  I  have  stnted  the  causes,  humanly  speaking,  of  th( 
errors.  It  is  then,  an  undisputed  tact,  t.hat  they  were  more  numeroun 
in  the  Grpek  than  in  the  Roman  church  ;  that  thu  'ioman  ctiunh  wfis 


VOMAN  CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  55 

jomparatively  free  from  them.  But  he  has  plainiy  nuisconoeived  the 
inference  to  be  drawn  from  the  fact;  and  it  is  this:  that  as  Rome 
was  the  primary  see,  the  centre  of  unity,  the  mother  and  mistress  of 
all  the  churches,  God  watched  over  her  with  peculiar  care,  and  pre- 
served her  from  the  errors  and  heresies  that  proved  infinitely  more 
fatal  than  the  pagan  persecutions,  to  the  churches  of  the  east.  While 
they  were  distracted,  the  Roman  church  was  united  in  faith ;  while 
they  were  in  danger  of  breaking  to  pieces  the  edifice  of  faith,  she  was 
consolidated,  herself,  and  laboring  to  consolidate  them  under  one  creed. 
If  any  thing  did  prolong  the  gos.pel  life  in  the  east,  it  was  tlie  authority 
of  Rome.  By  her  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Savior  vindicated,  and 
kept  pure  from  the  foul  admixture,  the  contamination  of  heresy.  By 
her  were  Ariaiiism,  Nestorianism,  Eutychiatiism,  Monotholism,  and  a 
hundred  other  novelties,  the  spurious  progeny  of  dangerous  opinions 
in  the  east,  successively  condemned. 

And  now,  having  disposed  of  the  ar^iment  which  appears  in  the 
van  of  the  gentleman's  remarks,  I  will  go  on  with  a  question  of  fact, 
to  which  he  has  again  referred,  touching  the  word  Catholic.  He  says 
that  it  is  not  found  in  the  New  Testament.  Admitting  that  it  is  not  in 
the  body  of  the  canon^  which  I  did  not  contend  for,  yet  it  is  prefixed 
to  some  of  the  epistles,  and  as  old,  if  not  older,  as  a  word  belonging 
to  the  household  of  faith,  than  they  are.  He  said  the  word  KaiJsAj** 
(^catholike)  was  prefixed  to  the  Epistle  of  James  in  the  year  1549,  by 
Robert  Stephens,  or  Robert  Etienne,  by  which  name  that  famous 
French  printer  is  better  known — about  300  years  ago.  Ye^,  and  I 
will  show  you  that  here  again  his  learning  is  at  fault,  that  to  the  300 
years  must  be  added  a  thousand  more,  aad  then  that  the  origin  of  the 
word  is  coeva\  with  Christianity.  Before  quoting  the  testimony  of  St. 
Gregory  Nazianxen,  a  writer  ofthe  4th  century,  I  will  observe,  that  seven 
of  the  epistles  found  in  the  Catholic  or  Protestant  Testaments,  are  call- 
ed catholic,  or  canonical,  as  not  having  been  addressed  to  any  particu- 
lar church,  or  person,  if  we  except  the  2d  and  3d  of  St.  John,  but  to  all 
the  churches.  Five  of  these  epistles,  viz.  that  of  St.  James,  the  2d  of 
St.  Peter,  the  2d  and  3d  of  St.  John,  the  epistle  of  St.  Jude,  as  also  the 
epistle  of  St,  Paul  to  the  Hebrews,  and  the  Apocalypse,  or  book  of 
Revelation  of  St.  John,  were  doubted  of,  and  not  always  and  evety 
where  received  iu  the  three  first  ages,  till  the  canon  and  catalogue  of 
the  books  of  scripture  were  determined  by  the  anthority  ofthe  Catho- 
lic church,  the  supreme  judge  of  all  controversies  in  matters  of  faith 
and  religion,  according  to  the  appointment -of  our  Savior,  Christ,  ex- 
pressed in  many  places  in  the  holy  scriptures.  These  I  have  men- 
tioned were  certainlj',  for  some  time,  doubted  of;  they  are  still  doubt- 
ed of  by  some  of  the  late  reformers.  Luther,  the  great  doctor  of  the 
reformation,  is  Eot  ashamed  to  say,  that  this  epistle  of  St.  James,  is  no 
better  than  straw,  and  unworthy  an  apostle.  Speaking  of  these  epis- 
tles, then,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  at  that  early  period,  uses  the  word  Cath- 
olic, and  designates  them  by  that  name: 

"  X^yytJ  iTs^fiT-Sif  t»v  'ixxacjiis  /uictv, 

Greg:  JVazianzen,  Carrnen  de  Canon.  Script. 

Ir.  English — "Some  say  there  are  seven  Catholic  epistles,  otheis 


56  DEBATE    OX    THE 

that  there  are  only  three — one  of  James,  one  of  Peter,  and  one  of  John  *' 
So  much  for  the  fourth  age.  Does  not  v.iy  friend  say  his  prayers? 
Does  not  every  Protestant  unite  v. in  every  Catholic  in  saying,  "I 
believe  in  the  holy  Catholic  church,"  as  we  are  taught  in  the  apostles' 
creed  ?  Speaking  of  this  most  ancient  formula  of  faith,  com  losed,  as 
it  is  believed,  by  the  apostles  themselves,  before  they  separated  fox 
the  great  work  of  preaching  to  all  nations,  that  it  may  be  for  ever  a 
bond  of  union  and  an  abridgment  of  sound  apostolic  belief,  Widding- 
ton  says,  p.  46.  "The  creed  which  was  first  adopted,  and  that  perhaps 
in  the  very  earliest  age,  by  the  church  of  Rome,  was  that  which  is  now 
called  the  apostles'  creed  ;  and  it  was  the  general  opirion  from  the 
fourth  century  downwards,  that  it  was  actually  the  production  of  those 
blessed  persons  assembled  for  that  purpose;  our  evidence  is  not  sufficient 
to  establish  that  fact,  and  some  writers  very  confidently  reject  it. 
But  there  is  reasonable  ground  for  our  assurance  that  the  form  of  faith, 
which  we  still  repeat  and  inculcate,  was  in  use  and  power  in  the  very 
early  propagation  of  our  religion."*  Now  will  the  gentleman  telJ 
us  that  the  word  Catholic — was  unknown  to  antiquity  ] 

You  will  perceive,  my  friends,  that  until  the  very  minute  Mr.  Camp- 
bell speaks,  I  know  not  what  he  is  going  to  say.  You  will  not  won- 
der that  following  him,  my  discourse  should  be  desultory  and  rambling, 
lam  here  under  every  disadvantage  to  which^a  speaker  can  be  subject. 
Obliged  to  leave  the  beaten  highway  and  follow  him  through  the 
thickets  into  which,  he  finds  it  useful  to  plunge  so  frequently. 

I  have  at  this  moment  in  my  hand,  a  copy  of  the  New  Testament,  a 
beautiful  edition,  published  in  Glasgow,  a  Presbyterian  city,  and  also 
an  edition  of  Robert  Etienne.  Behold  (displaying  them)  the  title 
"Catholic,"  prefixed  in  both,  to  these  epistles. 

I  have  now  established  the  fact  that  Catholic  was  the  ancient  name 
of  the  church — that  no  other  than  the  Roman  Catholic  was  entitled  to 
that  name — that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  is  the  Catholic  church 
cf  all  ages,  that  in  all  ages  it  has  had  a  head.  For  we  may  call  the 
pope  by  any  name  we  please,  the  name  is  nothing.  It  is  the  station, 
and  the  incumbpnt  thereof,  that  it  is  important  to  ascertain,  and  the 
nponday  is  not  clearer  than  that  both  existed  from  the  very  origin  of  the 
cnristian  religion  in  Rome- 
He  argues  against  the  supremacy  of  Rome  from  the  circumstance 
that  all  the  ecclesiastical  words  are  Greek. 

This  is  not  at  all  surprising.  There  was  not  a  particle  of  the  Scrip- 
tures originally  written  in  Latin.  Surely  my  friend  must  be  hard  pres- 
sed for  want  of  argument,  when  he  grasps  at  such  a  floating,  improba- 
ble, airy  one  as  that!  Words  are  but  the  signs  of  ideas.  But  he  af- 
firms that  all  the  epistles  are  written  to  Greek  cities.  Was  then  none 
of  these  epistles  written  to  Rome  !  And  was  Rome  a  Greek  city  1 
Does  not  Paul  surpass  himself — does  he  not  reason  most  deeply 
in  that  epistle  1  Does  he  not  style  the  Romans  the  "  Called  of  Jesus 
Christ ;  the  beloved  of  God  ?"  Does  he  not  say,  1st  ch.  v.  3,  "I  give 
thanks  to  my  God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  for  you  all,  because  your 
faith  is  spoken  of  in  the  whole  world"  1     Is  it  not  in  that  epistle^hat 

*  A  note  to  Waddingtou  on  this  subjett,  rontains  thf  follovrinn  rpniar'i:  "Ig- 
natius, Justin,  and  Ireuceus,  make  no  mention  of  it,  but  they  orcasionally  repeal 
»3me  words,  contained  in  it,  which  is  held  as  a  proof  that  they  ku^w  it  hy  heart.'' 


ROJLVN  CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  57 

he  confounds  the  Jews,  by  proving  that  the  ceremonial  works  of  the 
law  avail  them  nothiiitr  towards  salvation,  and  the  Gentiles  by  shew- 
ing thai  their  shameful  excesses,  notwithstanding  the  boasted  lights 
of  philosophy,  involved  them  equally  with  the  rejected  Jews  in  the 
divine  malediction  1  Does  he  not  devote  eleven  chapters  of  this  epis- 
tle tn  establish  solidly  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  christian  faithi 

Finally,  was  not  the  church  of  Rome  at  least  as  ancient  as  the  church 
of  Corinth  1 

My  friend  spoke  of  transubstantiation,  and  purgatory.     These  wil 
come  in  their  proper  place  in  the  debate. 

The  conclusion  of  all  his  arguments  is,  that  the  Roman  Catholic 
church  is  a  sect.  This,  I  may  venture  to  say,  he  has  failed  to  prove. 
Indeed  he  has  done  any  thing  but  prove  it;  forhe  has  in  fact  strengthen- 
ed my  grounds  of  defence,  for  the  more  he  has  questioned  my  authori- 
ties and  arguments,  the  more  signally  have  I  established  them. 

My  friend  is  correct  in  saying  that  to  prove  the  church  not  Caiholie^ 
is  to  prove  her  neither  holy  nor  apostolic.  Had  he  acted  on  this  hint, 
and  compressed  his  first  three  propositions  into  one,  and  condensation 
is  all  important  in  discussion,  he  would  have  greatly  abridged  his  own 
labor,  and  saved  this  audience  and  myself  much  loss  of  time.  I  have 
proved  that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  is  now  the  only  church 
that  is,  as  a  church,  (and  not  as  a  band  of  sailors  or  travellers  without  any 
fixed  habitation,)  spread  over  the  entire  world  ;  that  she  only  has  been 
80  from  the  beginning,  to  the  exclusion  of  every  sect :  that  she  alone 
now  bears,  that  she  alone  has  ever  borne  the  name  of  Catholic;  that 
no  other  denomination,  no  sect  now  has  or  ever  had  a  right  to  it — and 
that,  as  she  is  Catholic,  she  is  also  holy,  she  is  apostolic,  she  is 
divine,  and  consequently  the  only  true  church  of  Christ.  By  the 
same  strictness  of  investigation  and  of  reasoning,  by  the  same 
splendid  evidence  of  fads,  I  will  prove  that  she  alone  is  united  in 
faith  and  government  as  the  true  church  should  be ;  for  Christ 
prayed  for  his  disciples  the  night  before  he  suffered,  "that  they 
may  be  one,  as  thou  Father  in  Heaven  and  I  are  one."  Now  in  what 
church  shall  we  seek  for  this  unity  1  We  shall  see  that,  later  in  the  de- 
bate, for  notwithstanding  the  admission  of  my  friend,  we  must  plod  our 
weary  ro and,  debating  these  propositions  as  he  has  penned  them.  But 
the  gentleman  says,  "  the  Roman  Catholic  church  assumes  every  thing." 
No,  my  brethren,  it  is  not  so.  When  she  can  so  validly  establish  her 
claim,  she  does  not,  she  has  no  occasion  to  assume  any  thing.  She 
proves  all  things,  and  holds  fast  to  them  because  they  are  good.  la 
the  first  place  we  prove  from  scripture  that  Christ  did  establish  an 
earthly  head  to  his  church,  and  that  that  head  was  the  apostle  Peter 
If  not,  why  did  he  say  to  Peter,  "  Tfiou  art  Peter,  (a  rock)  and  upon 
this  rock  ivill  I  build  my  church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it"?  Again,  he  did  give  him  a  preeminence  over  the  other 
apostles.  If  not,  why  did  he  say  to  him,  Luke,  xxii.  32,  "Simon, 
Simon,  behold  Satan  hath  desired  to  have  you  (in  the  plural,  that  is,  all 
the  apostles)  that  he  may  sift  you  as  wheat,  but  I  have  prayed  for  thee 
that  thy  faith  fail  not,  and  thou  being  converted,  confirm  thy  brethren'''  'f 
He  told  Peter  that  he  would  deny  him — that  he  would  fall — bnt  he  at 
the  same  time  cheered  him  by  the  divine  assurance  that  his  fall  should 
not  be  for  ever,  that  he  would  arise  from  it,  and  that  after  his  transitory 
humiliation,  no  longe"  presumptuously  confiding  in  his  c-wn  sttength, 


58  "  •  DEBATE   ON   THE 

but  piacinor  all  his  trust  in  God,  he  should  not  only  securely  stand  him- 
self before  both  Jews  and  Gentiles,  but  likewise  strengthen  and  sup- 
port his  brethren.  For  this  Christ  prayed  for  Peter,  and  the  Father 
who  also  loves  the  church,  heard  and  he  will  ever  hear  that  prayer. 
The  faith  of  Peter  hath  never  failed.  When  did  he  ever  say  this  to 
the  other  apostles  1  Peter  is  named  first,  when  the  apostles  are  enu- 
merated ;  he  speaks  first  in  the  meeting  of  the  apostles  and  brethren, 
and  gives  instructions  to  proceed  to  the  choosing  an  apostle  in  the  place 
of  the  Iscariot.  He  is  the  first  to  reproach  the  Jews  with  deicide,  and  at 
his  preaching  eight  thousand  are  converted.  He  is  sent  by  an  angel 
from  heaven,  to  the  gentile  Cornelius  ;  is  released  from  prison  by  an 
angel  ;  confirms  the  Samaritans  with  St.  John  :  healeth  yEneas  at  Lyd- 
da:  raiseth  Tahitha  from  death  at  Joppa  ;  founds  the  first  see  among 
the  gentiles  at  Antioch.  He  speaks  first  in  the  council  at  Jerusalem, 
"men,  brethren,  &c."  Acts,  xv.  "and  all  the  multitude  among  whom 
there  had  been  previously,  much  disputing,  held  their  peace."  "  Then 
after  three  years"  says  St.  Paul,  Gal.  i.  13.  "1  went  to  Jerusalem  to 
see  Peter,  and  I  tarried  with  him  fifteen  days."  And  ch.  2.  v.  1.  "Then 
after  fourteen  years  I  went  up  again  to  Jerusalem,  and  I  went  up  ac- 
cording to  revelation,  and  conferred  with  them  the  gospel  which  I  preach 
^aiong  the  gentiles,  lest  perhaps  I  should  run,  or  had  run  in  vain." 

My  friend  says  that  this  assumption  is  followed  by  injurious  effects, 
?.igious  and  political,  inconsequence  of  the  power  wielded  by  a  single 
.ndividual.  This  directly  impeaches  the  foreknowledge  and  sanctity 
of  Christ.  He  established  the  power,  and  from  its  exercise  within  the 
just  limits,  which  he  has  prescribed,  I  maintain  that  no  consequences 
injurious  either  to  religious  or  civil  society  can  ever  ensue.  History 
^Itests,  and  I  have  quoted  some  striking  instances  from  the  records  of 
the  Greek  church,  that  the  power  of  the  popes  was  conskrvative.  Their 
influence  has  ever  been  most  favorable  to  the  best  interests  of  society 
as  well  as  of  religion.  They  were  the  friends  of  peace,  the  patrons 
of  learning,  the  umpires  of  angry  princes  and  hostile  nations  on  the 
one  hand,  while  on  the  other  they  preserved  pure  and  uncontaminated, 
the  holy  deposit  of  the  truth  and  proscribed  error.  Confined  to  its  pro- 
per sphere  the  influence  of  the  head  of  the  church  must  needs  be  salu- 
tary ,;  must,  if  God  was  wise,  be  beneficial  and  far  above  reproach. 
This  power  has  been  exerted  for  the  welfare  of  society  under  every  form 
of  government,  monarchical,  aristocratical,  mixed,  and  republican.  It 
is  the  friend  of  all.  It  is  irreconcileable  with  none,  but  of  the  tempo- 
ral influence  of  the  popes  it  will  be  time  enough  to  speak  in  its  proper 
place.  I  will  now  proceed  to  show  that  the  want  of  an  ecclesiastical 
superior,  whom  all  are  bound  to  obey,  lets  in  a  deluge  of  evils,  and 
these  irremediable,  on  every  religious  body  that  wants  a  head.  Reason, 
alone  should  attest  this  truth,  without  further  illustration.  The  sheep- 
fold  over  which  there  has  been  placed  no  shepherd,  will  soon  be  the 
prey  of  the  wolf.  The  school  in  which  no  teacher  presides,  the  soci- 
ety which  recognises  no  chief  magistrate,  will  not  fail  to  exhibit  a 
scene  of  confusion,  and  must  finally  be  dissolved.  Let  us  appeal  to 
experience.  What  has  multiplied  the  (so  called)  christian  sects  to 
such  an  excess  that  neither  the  evil  nor  the  remedy  can  be  any  longer 
endured  in  Protestant  communions'?  It  is  the  principle  contended  for 
by  my  opponent.  It  is  this,  as  bishop  Smith  justly  observes,  more 
prolific  than  the  knife  that  divides  the  polypus,  that  daily  multiplies 


ROJUAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGION.  59 

ilivisions  and  produces  new  sects  in  christiaHity.    Hear  a  kte  numbei 
o£  the  Baptist  Banner,  speaking  of  this  controversy.    It  says : — 

"  But  to  be  serious,  we  cannot  believe  that  any  good  will  ibllow  this  debate 
But  too  much  excitement  is  attempted  to  be  gotten  up  against  the  Honian  Ca- 
tholics— an  excitement  bordering  o:)  intolerance.  Could  we  feel  assured,  either 
from  his  course  in  this  instance  or  ("roui  a  retrospect  of  his  past  life,  that  Mr. 
Campbell  sought  this  discussion  solely  to  vindicate  truth  and  expose  error,  and 
not  ostentatiously  to  exhibit  his  tact  in  debate  and  to  reap  a  pecuniary  harvest 
by  a  neiv'  publication^  we  might  feel  less  distrust  of  consequences,  and  should 
bare  some  faint  hope  that  probably  good  would  ensue;  but  credulous,  nay,  stu- 
pid must  be  the  man,  who  in  looking  over  the  circuiimtances  which  have  con- 
Wirred  in  originating  this  debate,  can  suppose  that  any  religious  or  commendable 
motive  prouipted  hini  to  throw  the  gauntlet  and  provoke  the  controversy.  In 
looking  over  his  past  career,  a  love  of  truth  and  a  desire  to  promote  the  pea''e 
und  prosj>erity  of  Zion,  have  not  been  the  promineiit  traits  which  have  marked 
his  character  and  rendered  conspicuous  his  course.  [Bishop  P.  was  here  called 
to  order;  Mr.  Caiiipbel!  also  here  observed,  that  as  he  had  read  the  worst  part 
of  the  artirle  he  might  read  the  balance;  and  the  point  of  order  being  examin- 
ed, the  board  decided  that  he  was  in  order.]  We  do  not  speak  for  othet 
places,  but  in  Kentucky  he  has  caused  more  serious  injury  to  the  cause  of  reli 
eion,  more  disturbance,  more  wrangling,  collision,  and  division  in  society,  in  a 
few  years,  than  in  our  humble  judgment,  the  Catholics  can  ever  do.  But  we 
forbear.  The  debate  will  take  place.  The  Campbellites  will  sip  delicious  wis- 
dom iVom  the  lips  of  their  leader.  A  new  impulse  will  be  giveh  to  their  now 
drooping  state.  They  will  again  wage  his  high  claims  to  competency  to  reform 
religion  and  introduce  the  Millenoiuni.  And  Mr.  Campbell  will  have  thepromi 
»atisiartion  of  rendering  great  good — to  himself  by  tne  sale  o(  another  boo.';! 
This  will  be  about  all  that  will  result  frotil  this  discussion." 

1  knew  not  imtil  yesterday  that  the  Baptists  were  opposed  to  Mr. 
Campbell ;  but  as  necessarily  as  the  stream  flows  from  its  source, 
do  these  disastrous  effects  which  the  Baptist  Banner  deprecates,  fln\y 
from  the  system  which  acknowledges  no  head  in  religious  matters, 
but  allows  every  individual,  qualified  or  disqualified,  to  give  his  own 
crude  fancies  for  the  revelation  of  heaven. 

The  Zion's  "Advocate  of  the  28th  ult.  and  the  Palladium  of  the  7th 
inst.  give  similar  testimony  against  the  radicalism  of  my  friend.  But 
I  spare  him  the  reading.  You  can  now  judge  of  the  tree  by  its  fruits  ; 
his  are  bitterness  and  confusion,  those  of  the  Catholics,  admitting  a 
supremacy  in  the  church,  are  order,  unity  and  peace.  His  rule  nece.s- 
sarily  creates  enmities  and  endless  altercations  in  the  church;  the  Ca- 
tholic rule  cuts  them  up  by  the  very  roots,  and  not  only  arrests  their 
growth,  but  renders  their  very  existence  impossible. 

Mr.  Campbell  said  that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  was  an  apos- 
tacy /row  the  true  Church,  and  that  this  event,  so  important  in  the  an- 
nals of  the  world,  took  place  precisely  on  the  16th  of  July  1054,  when 
she  separated  from  the  Greek  church.  It  is  a  pity,  as  he  intended  to 
be  so  particular,  that  he  did  not  tell  us  whether  it  was  old  style  or  new. 

But  perceiving  the  terrible  effect  of  this  admission,  upon  his  argu- 
ment, he  retraces  his  steps,  and  taking  us  all  aback,  he  says  that  the 
Greek  church  was  not  after  all  the  true  church  of  Christ,  and  thu^  he 
lias  left  us  as  much  in  the  dark  as  ever.  Remember  I  told  him  how 
much  it  had  puzzled  the  world  and  would  puzzle  him  to  settle  that 
point.  I  ask  him  again  then,  if  the  Roman  Catholic  church  apostatiz- 
ed from  the  church  of  Christ  at  the  period  in  question,  and  the  Greek 
church,  from  which  she  separated,  was  as  corrupt  as  nerself.  wliere 
was,  at  that  time,  the  true  church  1  God's  covenant  with  her,  Ezech. 
xxxvii.  fr2,  was  an  everlasting  covenant  of  peace,  a  covenant,  like  that 
of  day  and  night,  to  last  for  all   generations.  .Ire.  xxxiii.  00,  21,  al- 


80  DEBATE    OJf    THE 

ways  visible,  Is.  ii.  2.  S.Michers  iv.  1.  2.  spread  far  and  near,  and 
teachlnor  many  nations,  Ps.  xi.  8.  Dan.  xi.  35.  44.  Malach.  i.  11. 
The  pillar  and  the  ground  of  truth,  unfailing;  the  gates  of  hell  were 
.lever  to  prevail  against  her.  If  all  these  glorious  prophecies  were  not 
fulfilled  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  in  what  other  church  we;e  they 
fulfilled  ?     When  will  my  friend  answer  me? 

Mr.  C.  observes  that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  or  the  see  of  Peter, 
assumes  to  be  the  representative  of  Christ  in  all  his  power,  ecclesiasti- 
cal and  political,  and  that  as  Christ  was  supreme  head  over  all  the 
earth,  temporal  and  spiritual,  so  was  Peter,  and  so  are  his  successors. 

I  have  already  shewn  that  this  is  no  part  or  parcel  of  the  Catholic 
doctrine.  The  pope's  power  is  spiritual,  his  kingdom  like  that  of 
Christ,  is  not  of  this  world.  He  has  not  a  solitary  inch  of  ground 
over  which  to  exercise  temporal  authority  in  any  territory  on  earth,  be- 
yond the  narrow  limits  of  the  papal  states;  and  the  authority  with 
which  he  is  there  invested  rather  originated  in  the  people's  preference 
of  the  bishop's  crosier  to  the  kingly  sceptre,  than  in  any  views  he  could 
himself,  have  cherished  of  worldly  aggrandizement.  Hear  Gibbon,  iii. 
vol.  p.  2.30.,  Phil.  1830.  "The  want  of  laws  could  only  be  supplied 
by  the  influence  of  religion,  and  their  foreign  and  domestic  counsels 
were  moderated  by  the  authority  of  the  bishop.  His  alms,  his  ser- 
mons, his  correspondence  with  the  king  and  prelates  of  the  west,  his 
recent  services,  their  gratitude,  an  oath,  accustomed  the  Romans  to 
consider  him  as  the  first  magistrate.  The  christian  humility  of  the 
popes  was  not  offended  by  the  name  of  </w/n/»i«s  or  lord,  and  their  face 
and  inscription  is  still  apparent  on  the  most  ancient  coins.  Their  tem- 
poral dominion  is  now  confirmed  by  the  reverence  of  a  thousand  years  ; 
and  their  noblest  title  is  the  free  choice  of  a  people,  whom  they  had 
redeemed  from  slavery." 

I  had  a  great  deal  of  other  ground  to  go  over  on  this  point,  but  my 
time  is  limited  ;  and  I  will  now  proceed  to  review  one  of  the  most 
dreadful  charges  ever  made  against  a  pope  of  Rome,  and  to  show  that 
it  is  totally  without  foundation. 

If  I  understood  Mr.  C.  aright,  he  asserted,  that  it  was  the  pope  Gre- 
gory consecrated  Phocas  the  centurion  king,  in  the  church  of  St.  John 
the  Baptist  in  Constantinople,  and  that  he  did  so,  contrary  to  every  law 
of  God,  or  man,  for  the  base,  the  iniquitous  purchase  of  the  title  of  pope. 

(Mr.  Campbell  reasserted  the  charge.) 

Now  I  aver  that  the  charge  is  unfounded  and  false.    I  mean  no  dis- 
respect to  Mr.  C.     He  would  not  intentionally  deceive  this  assembly 
or  wilfully  sustain  by   calumny  an  otherwise  hopeless  cause.     But 
leaving  motives  to  their  proper  judge,  I  shall  now  prove  to  this  audi 
ence  that  he  has  stated  what  is   not  true,  and  alleged   odious  charges 
against  the  pope  which  he  cannot  substantiate.     On  his  own  reputa 
tion  for  accuracy  and  his  knowledge  of  history  let  the  penalty  for  eve 
rest,  of  having  been  this  day  detected  before  so  many  of  his   fellow 
citizens,  egregiously  at  fault  in  both.  Hormisdas  king  of  Persia,  indig 
nant  at  the  defeat  of  his  general  Varamus  (see  Nalalis  Alex.  saec.  sext 
Art.  V.  p.  226,)  sends  him  a  petticoat  in  derision.     The  war  is  renew 
ed ;  Mauritius  loses  12000  troops,  taken  prisoners  by  theChagan  ;    h«J 
refuses  to  release  them  by  paying  the  humble  pittance  set  as  a  price  on 
the  head  of  each  by  the  victor ;  they  are  butchered  in  cold  blood  ;   hiM 
people,  shocked  at  his  avarice  and  cruelty  revolt — Mauritius  abdicates — 


K0MA2V    CATflOLlt!    RELIGION.  61 

the  people  choose  the  centurion,  Phocaa,  to  reign  over  them  in  hia 
stead  ;  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople  consecrates  Phocas  king,  in  the 
church  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  in  C.  P.  The  entire  story  is  thus  re- 
lated by  Gibbon. 

"The  troops  of  Maurice  might  listen  to  the  voice  of  a  victorious  leader,  they 
disdained  the  admonitions  of  statesmen  and  sophists,  and  when  the)-  received  aa 
edict  which  deducted  from  their  paj'  the  price  of  their  arn's  and  clothing,  thev  . 
execrated  the  avarice  of  a  prnice  insensible  of  the  dangers  and  fatigues  from  whicn 
he  had  escaped:  and  every  age  must  condemn  the  inhumanity  or  avarice  of  a 
prince,  who  by  the  trifling  ransom  of  six  thousand  pieces  of  gold,  mighthave  pre- 
vented the  massacre  of  12,000  prisoners  in  the  bands  of  the  Chagan.  In  the  first 
fervor  of  indignation,  an  order  was  signified  to  the  army  of  tne  Danube,  that 
they  should  spare  the  magazines  of  the  province,  and  establish  their  winter-quar- 
ters ir  the  hostile  country  of  the  Avars.  The  measure  of  their  grievances  waa 
full  '  they  pronounced  Maurice  unworthy  to  reign,  expelled  or  slaughtered  his 
faillitul  adherents,  and,  under  t'le  command  of  Phocas,  a  simple  centurion,  return- 
ed by  ha»ty  marches  to  the  neighborhood  of  Constantinople. 

"  'the  rigid  and  parsimonious  virtues  of  Maurice  had  long  since  alienated  the 
hearts  of  his  subjects;  and  a  vile  j)lebeian,  who  represented  liis  countenance  and 
apparel,  was  seated  on  an  ass,  ancl  pursued  by  the  imprecations  of  the  multitude.* 
Tbe  emperor  suspected  the  popularity  of  Gernianus  with  the  soldiers  and  citi- 
zens; he  feared,  he  threatened,  but  he  delayed  to  strike;  the  patrician  fled  to 
the  sanctuary' of  the  church;  the  people  rose  in  his  defence,  the  walls  were  de 
serted  by  the  guards,  and  the  lawless  city  was  abandoned  to  the  flames  and  ra 
piue  of  nocturnal  tumult.  In  a  small  bark  the  unfortunate  Maurice,  with  his  wife 
and  nine  children,  escaped  to  the  Asiatic  shore;  but  the  violence  of  the  wind 
compelled  him  to  land  at  the  church  of  St.  Antoninus,  near  Chalcedon,  from 
whence  he  despatched  Theodosius,  his  eldest  son,  to  implore  the  gratitude  and 
friendship  of  the  Persian  monarch.  For  himself,  he  refused  to  fly.  His  bodj 
was  tortured  with  sciatic  pains,  his  mind  was  enfeebled  bv  superstition;  he  pa- 
tiently awaited  the  event  of  the  revolution,  and  addressed  a  tervent  and  public 
prayer  to  the  Almighty,  that  the  punishment  of  his  sins  might  be  inflicted  in  this 
world,  rather  than  in  a  future  life.  After  the  abdication  of  Maurice,  the  two 
factions  disputed  the  choice  of  an  emperor;  but  the  favorite  of  the  blues,  was  re- 
jected by  the  jealousy  of  their  antagonists,  and  Gernianus  himself  was  hurried 
along  by  the  crowds,  who  rushed  to  the  palace  of  Hebdomen,  seven  miles  from 
the  city,  to  adore  the  majesty  of  Phocas,  the  centurion.  A  modest  wish  of  re- 
signing the  purple  to  the  rank  and  merit  of  Gernianus  was  opposed  b)'  his  resolu- 
tion, more  obstinate,  and  equally  sincere  :  the  senate  and  clergy  obeyed  this 
summons,  and  as  soon  as  the  patriarch  was  assured  of  his  orthodox  belief,  he  con.' 
secrated  the  successful  usurper  in  the  church  of  St.  Jphn  the  Baptist."  Gibbon; 
sixth  Anier.  Kdit.  of  the  Hist,  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire.  Page 
184.     Vol.  iii.  A.  D.  1830. 

Thus  it  appears  that  Gregory  did  not  act  the  part  assigned  him  by 
my  friend,  and  that  this  accusation  turns  out  to  be,  like  a  thousand 
others,  taken  up  at  second  hand,  without  examination  or  suspicion  of 
falsehood  or  incorrectness,  against  the  pope,  a  mere  fabrication  with- 
out a  shadow  of  foundation  in  history !  "What  will  this  enlightened 
audience  now  say  ?  What  apology  is  my  friend  prepared  to  make 
for  having  unconsciously  led  them  into  error?  This  case  may  illustrate 
many  others  that  are  similar,  and  I  beg  it  may  not  be  forgotten. 
[Napoleon,  Papin,  &c.  are  parallels,  the  pontiff  could  not  resist  the 
will  of  an  entire  people;  and  it  would  only  perpetuate  lawless  vio- 
lence and  disorder  to  contest  a  claim  to  the  throne,  to  which  no  one 
was  able  to  support  his  rival  pretensions.     The  pope  seeing  that  the 

*  In  their  clamors  against  Maurice,  the  people  of  Constantinople  branded  biin 
with   the   name  of   Marciouite  nr  Marclonist;    a  heresy,  (says   Theophylact,   Lib. 

Viii.   C.   U.)  ftiTX    Tivo;    uvfjCf    tvKxi:iX{   iuii3>i,-    re    xxi    xxTaysA-xrTO;.       Did   they   only 

cast  out  a  vague  reproach,   or  had   the  emperor  really   listened   to  some  olHicurs 
teacher  of  those  ancient  Gnostics  7 
¥ 


62  "  DEBATE    ON    THE 

people,  who  had  the  right,  selected  themselves  a  new  ruler,  like  a 
true  lover  of  peace  and  friend  of  established  order^oncrratulated  Phocaa 
on  his  election,  and  used  the  language  of  scripture,  be  it  observed,  in 
his  letter,  because  anarchy  was  at  an  end,  and  an  orthodox  and  gener- 
ous prince  substituted  on  the  throne  of  C.  P.  for  a  tyrant,  a  miser,  and 
a  suspected  Marcionite  heretic.  Mauritius  may  have  died  penitent, 
but  he  reigned  without  love  for  his  subjects. 

We  were  spoken  to  of  the  president  of  the  U.  S.  He  has  the  same 
power  and  authority  as  Washington  had  while  the  constitution  of  the 
country  endures.  And  as  long  as  the  constitution  of  the  church  en- 
dures, the  successors  of  Peter  have  the  authority  of  Peter.  If  there 
was  ever  to  come  a  time,  when  the  true  church  was  to  fail,  Jesus 
Christ  was  bound  by  his  wisdom,  and  love  to  foretell  it.  If  it  was  his 
intention  to  forsake  the  church,  and  if  the  power  and  authorities  of  all 
the  regularly  constituted  orders  were  to  fail,  he  never  should  have 
given  it  the  promis6  of  perpetual  endurance,  and  the  precise  period,  and 
all  the  different  circumstances  of  its  defection  should  have  been  more 
clearly  and  emphatically  revealed,  than  any  other  event  in  the  scrip- 
ture. It  is  needless  to  add  that  such  defection  is  not  foretold  ;  but  on 
the  contrary  it  is  repeatedly  declared  by  the  Son  of  God,  that  his 
church  should  stand  forever,  that  his  Holy  Spirit  should  abide  with  it 
all  days,  that  the  gates  of  Hell  should  not  prevail  against  it.  What  is 
the  meaning  of  the  words  "the  gates  of  Hell  shall  not  prevail  against 
hi"  In  the  east,  laws  were  enacted,  justice  administered,  and  the 
sages  and  people  assembled  for  deliberation  at  the  gates  of  the  cities. 
Hence  the  expression  denotes,  wisdom,  subtlety,  malice.  Again, 
when  a  city  was  invaded  by  a  hostile  army,  the  hottest  fighting  was 
around  its  gates.  In  them  and  around  them,  were  all  the  energies  of 
the  conflicting  hosts  put  forth — and  on  the  issue  of  the  battle  was  sus- 
pended a  nation's- weal  or  woe.  Thus  by  the  gates  of  Hell  are  clearly 
meant,  all  the  craft  and  power  of  Hell,  the  malice  of  heresy  and  er- 
ror, the  force  and  violence  of  persecution.  All  these  shall  rage  around 
the  church  in  vain,  for  Christ  is  in  the  citadel,  and  his  Holy  Spirit  is  the 
sentinel  that  guards  fts  outposts  and  defences  from  being  overthrown 
by  error.  But  he  says  that  the  apostles  had  all  power  given  to  them 
— grant  it — but  what  was  the  nature  of  that  power?  what  was  its  ex- 
tent? It  was  a  power  to  teach  all  nations.  The  weapon  of  their  war- 
fare was  not  carnal  but  spiritual  ;  "  for  our  wrestling,"  says  St.  Paul, 
Ephes.  VI.  12."isnotagainst  flesh  and  blood,  but  against  principalities 
and  powers,  against  the  rulers  of  the  world  of  this  darkness,  against  the 
spirits  of  wickedness  in  the  high  places."  "  Behold,"  says  Ciirist,  "  1 
send  you  as  lambs  in  the  midst  of  wolves.  Carry  not  with  you  scrip 
nor  staff,  &c.  Be  not  solicitous  for  the  morrow,  what  you  shall  eat,  or 
wherewithal  you  shall  be  clothed.  Behold  the  lilies  of  the  field,  they 
sow  not,  neither  do  they  spin — and  yet  your  Heavenly  Father  clotheth 
them — careth  for  them — how  much  more  ye,  &c."  By  patience  they 
were  to  run  towards  the  fight  proposed  to  them,  and  by  patience  they  tri- 
umphed over  their  persecutors.  The  pope,  should  occasion  require, 
will  show  himself  the  faithful  imitator  of  these  heroic  models.  Were 
he  stript  to-morrow  of  all  external,  temporal  power  whatever,  and  a 
poor  wanderer  among  the  mountains  of  the  moon  in  Abyssinia,  he 
would  have  no  less  power,  and  would  be,  for  aught  I  know,  no  less 
respected,  than  he  is  at  present.     His  chief  authority  is,  thank  God, 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGIOlf.  63 

such  as  this  world  can  neither  give  nor  take  away.  It  was  given  for 
the  salvation  of  the  people  of  God,  and  as  long  as  there  is  a  soul  to  be 
saved,  a  sheep  to  be  1)rought  back  to  the  fold,  or  a  spiritual  conquest 
achieved  for  the  glory  of  Christ,  and  the  praise  of  his  grace,  so  long 
shall  that  power  survive  ;  when  all  else  decays,  itself,  amidst  vicissi- 
tudes unchanged,  shall  flourish  in  immortal  youth. 

For  our  sakes,  in  this  distant  province  of  creation,  and  at  this  late  age, 
as  well  as  for  those  who  saw  the  Word  made  flesh  conversing  among 
men,  was  this  commission  given  and  this  authority  conferred.  Our 
souls  were  no  less  dear  to  Christ  than  were  those  of  tiie  first  be- 
lievers of  glad  tidings — and  Cincinnati  was  the  rival  of  Jerusalem  in 
the  Savior's  love !  With  him  there  was  no  exception  of  persons — 
neither  past  nor  future.  He  provided  for  every  casualty  which  he 
foreknew  should  happen  in  the  lapse  of  ages — he  anticipated  every 
favorable  or  adverse  circumstance  that  should  affect  the  condition  of 
his  church,  and  with  divine  wisdom  he  adapted  its  constitutions  to  the 
peculiar  exigencies  of  every  age  and  nation  and  individual  believer, 
until  W3  reach  "the  consummation  of  the  world."  He  sent  his  apos- 
tles with  power  to  ordain  faithful  men,  who  should  in  their  turn  be  fit 
to  teach  others.  This  is  the  charge  that  St.  Paul  repeated  to  Titus, 
and  thus  has  the  succession  of  apostolic  teachers  been  continued  from 
nation  to  nation,  and  from  age  to  age,  the  church  gaining  in  one  region 
of  the  earth  what  she  had  lost  in  another,  renewing  her  youth  like  the 
eagles,  increasing  her  members,  and  daily  transmitting  to  the  bright 
realms  of  heavenly  glory  innumerable  multitudes  of  h*  children  of 
every^clime  and  tongue,  and  peculiarity  of  social  government  or  manners. 

The  apostles  exercised  various  functions — I  admit  it.  But  they 
substituted  the  deacons  to  wait  on  tables,  and  distribute  the  alms,  so 
do  their  successors  ;  Christ  gave  them  powers  adequate  to  every 
emergency. 

It  has  been  wrongly  asserted,  that  Moses  had  no  successor.  Joshua 
was,  in  one  important  branch,  his  successor,  for  it  devolved  on  him  to 
lead  the  people  into  the  land  of  promise,  and  without  this  consummation, 
the  ministry  of  Moses  would  have  been  in  vain  ;  and  there  are  Joshuas 
now  whose  office  it  is  to  lead  the  people  to  their  spiritual  Canaan— 
and  as  God  obeyed  the  voice  of  Joshua,  in  commanding  the  sun  to 
stand  still,  so  he  now  obeys  the  voice  of  his  priests  making  suppli- 
cation for  his  people.  Here  is  an  obvious  analogy  between  the  old 
and  the  nev,'  covenants.  My  friend  argues  that,  because  Moses  had 
no  successor,  Peter  could  have  none,  and  the  apostles  none;  but  it  is 
clear  that  Moses  had  a  successor.  All  that  Moses  accomplished  would 
have  been  incomplete  without  a  succession  of  ministry  to  carry  on  the 
work  of  God  in  favor  of  his  people,  Israel.  This,  Eusebius  beauti- 
fully establishes,  p.  46.  So  by  the  same  analogy,  it  is  necessary  that 
the  succession  of  an  apostolic  priesthood  should  be  continued  forthe  car- 
rying on  of  the  christian  dispensation,  and  be  transmitted  down  from  gen- 
eration of  spiritual  guides  to  generation,  until  they  shall  have  conducted 
all  the  people  of  God  to  the  true  land  of  promise,  where  I  trust  we  shall 
all  meet,  and  cease  to  dispute,  as  we  now  do,  like  little  children,  at 
the  imminent  risk  of  neglecting  the  weightier  points  of  the  law.  For 
mj'self,  1  am  heartily  sick  of  such  interminable  contention.  Here 
would  I  stop  and  suffer  the  matter  to  end  without  another  word,  if  the 
sad  necessity  was  not  imposed  upon  me  of  defending  the  impugned 


IM  -  DKAATE    OJf    THE 

tenets  of  my  church,  and  giving  with  my  voice  the  testimony  which, 
with  the  divine  assistance,  I  should  not  hesitate  to  seal  with  my  blood, 
to  the  truths  of  the  Roman  Catholic  faith.  From  the  discharge  of  this 
duty,  nq  true  believer,  still  more  no  minister  of  God,  should  shrink ; 
and  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that,  with  all  the  love  and  humil'ty  of  St. 
Paul,  he  should  have  warned  his  disciple  Timothy,  and  still  more  the 
body  of  the  faithful,  against  associating  with  "heretics."  I  never  use 
this  word,  as  it  is  now  so  harshly  understood,  to  designate  those  who 
differ  from  me  in  religion  ;  but  I  know  not  how  any  human  being  is  to 
determine  without  the  aid  of  a  competent  tribunal,  who  are  heretics, 
and  who  are  not;  for  we  cannot  look  into  the  heart. 

I  am  told  that  an  English  divine  was  accustomed  humorously  to  de- 
fine these  terms  in  this  way.  "Orthodoxy  is  my  doxy  and  heterodoxy 
is  yours."  But  seriously,  what  being  on  earth  can  look  into  the  secrets 
of  the  heart?  Who  was  to  determine  when  heresy  occurred  t  That 
it  existed  in  the  early  days  of  the  church  none  can  doubt.  The  apostles 
denounced  it.  They  delivered  its  authors  to  Satan  (of  whom  St.  Paul 
says,  are  Hj'meneus  and  Alexander  whom  I  have  delivered  to  Satan,  that 
they  may  learn  not  to  blaspheme.  1st  Tim.  1.  20.)  The  apostles  ilid 
not  suffer  their  disciples  to  make  this  discrimination  for  themselves,  in 
defiance  of  the  express  word  of  God.  They  did  not  allow  every  man 
to  assert  the  right  of  private  judgment  on  scripture,  which  they  taughl 
was  of  no  "private  interpretation."  2  Peter,  1.  20.  The  very  form 
"understanding  this  first"  exceedingly  strengthens  the  text.  Divisions 
will  ever  exist.  They  are,  unfortunately,  as  natural  to  depraved  man, 
as  vice  ;  and  but  little,  if  at  all  less  fatal.  "  There  were  als^fake 
prophets  among  the  people,''^  says  St.  Peter,  2d  Ep.  xi,  1,  even  09 
there  shall  he  among  you  lying  teachers,  who  shall  bring  in  sects  of 
perdition,  and  again  v.  10  and  12,  "  They  fear  not  to  bring  in  sects, 
blaspheming  those  things  that  they  know  not,  promising  their  disciples 
liberty,  whereas  they. themselves  are  the  slaves  of  corruption."  T'^ese 
are  fountains  without  water,  clouds  tossed  with  whirlwinds,  or  as  St. 
Jude  says,  V.  13,  "raging  waves  of  the  sea,  foaming  out  of  their 
own  confusion,  wandering  stars  to  whom  the  storm  of  darkness  is  re- 
served for  ever."  Who  would  trust  his  safety  in  a  perilous  voyage 
to  an  unskilful  pilot  1  Who  would  risk  the  horrors  of  the  deep  without 
chart  or  compass?  Has  God  abandoned  his  children  so  far  as  to  leave 
them  a  prey  to  every  innovator,  every  wolf  in  sheep's  clothing  1  Is 
there  no  ark  of  safety  for  man,  while  the  waters  of  error  overspread 
the  earth]  Yes,  my  friends,  there  is.  It  is  the  church.  That  ark 
alone  can  save  the  world.  "  Whosoever,"  says  St.  John,  2d  Ep.  9, 
10,  "revolteth  and  continueth  not  in  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  hath  not 
God.  If  any  man  come  to  you  and  bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive 
him  not  into  the  house,  nor  say  to  him,  'God  speed  you.'  For  he  that 
sayeth  '  God  speed  you,'  communica^teth  with  his  wicked  works." 
This  admonition,  we  understand  to  be  directed  against  false  religions 
and  false  teachers.  It  does  not  forbid  charity,  which  we  owe  to  all 
men,  and  particularly  the  erring;  for  whom,  we  are  taught  it  to  be  our 
duty  10  pray,  that  they  may  happily  come  to  the  knowledge  of 
truth. 

I  confess  that,  for  my  part,  T  cannot  practise  this  doctrine  literally, 
nor  refuse  to  salute  one  who  differs  from  me  in  faith.  I  retain  my 
own  convictions  and  eschew  his  errors.     The  apostles  did  differently, 


SOMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  65 

and  who  will  presume  to  say,  they  were  not  more  enlightened  than  we  ? 
When  St.  John  met  Cerinthus  (who  denied  the  divinity  of  Christ)  in 
the  baths  of  Ephesus,  he  ran  out  saying  that  he  was  afraid  the  baths 
would  fall  upon  him.  And  when  his  disciple  St.  Polycarp  met  Mar- 
cion,  in  the  streets  of  Rome,  he  refused  to  salute  him.  "  Do  you  not 
know  me  1"  said  Marcion.  "  1  do  know  youi"  replied  Polycarp, "  to  be 
the  oldest  son  of  the  Devil."  This  shows  the  dread  of  religions  inno- 
vators entertained  by  the  apostles  of  Christ  and  by  their  disciples,  the 
dangerous  result  of  heresy. — [Time  expired.] 

Half-past  1 1  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

I  am  sorry  that  I  cannot  sympathize  with  the  gentleman  in  his  em- 
barrassment, occasioned,  as  he  alleges,  in  being  obliged  to  respond 
promptly  to  objections  to  his  doctrines,  which,  he  says,  he  cannot  anti- 
cipate. So  far  as  he  is  placed  in  the  predicament  of  a  respondent  to 
my  allegations,  he  has  no  one  to  blame  but  himself.  When  arrang- 
ing the  preliminaries  as  to  the  mode  in  which  this  discussion  was  to 
be  conducted,  the  gentleman  perseveringly  insisted  that  I  should  lead 
the  way,  commencing  every  session ;  and  that,  whether  the  proposition 
were  affirmative  or  negative,  he  must  always  respond.  It  was  a  sine 
qua  nan  with  him,  that  he  should  always  have  the  last  word.  I 
would,  as  an  apology  for  giving  him  such  an  advantage,  inform  my  au- 
dience, that  on  no  other  condition  would  he  consent  to  meet  me.  If,  how- 
ever, he  sincerely  dislikes  the  arrangement,  I«am  willing  to  alter  it, 
and  change  places  wiih  him  to-morrow.  The  affirmative,  should,  in 
all  right,  and  by  universal  usage,  open,  and  the  respondent  follow,  in 
debate. 

I  regard  this  discussion,  my  friends,  as  a  very  serious  and  important 
affair,  involving  in  it  the  very  best  interests  of  the  whole  community. 
I  do  not  appear  here  to  speak  for  myself  alone  in  behalf  of  Protestant- 
ism, or  to  you  alone'.  I  speak  for  my  contemporaries,  and  for  the  great 
cause  of  truth;  and  I  am  glad  for  their  sake  that  this  debate  is  imme« 
diately  to  go  to  record.  I  must,  therefore,  give  as  connected  a  form 
as  circumstances  will  permit  to  my  argument.  For  this  reason,  I 
passed  over  some  things  in  the  speech  of  yesterday  that  I  might  finish 
my  first  argument  this  morning.  I  unfortunately,  however,  forgot  to 
notice  them  before  I  commenced  my  second  proposition. 

I  will  now  recapitulate. — 

The  question  was  asked  me,  yesterday  evening,  "  Where  was  the 
true  church  before  the  time  of  the  Greek  schism?"  I  observed,  this 
morning,  in  answer,  that  my  having  shown  the  Greek  church  to  be  the 
senior,  or  the  original  of  the  Roman,  did  not  necessarily  involve  the 
idea  that  the  Greek  church  was  at  the  time  of  separation  the  true  Catholic 
church.  To  this  answer  the  gentleman  has  not  replied  ;  but  yet  reiter- 
ates the  question.  His  assumption  of  a  church  of  nations  with  a  poli- 
tical head,  having  always  existed,  so  confounds  him  that  he  cannot  see 
a  church  without  a  pope,  or  a  national  establishment.  I  might  ask, 
in  reply,  where  was  the  church  before  the  days  of  Constantine  I 

We  can,  however,  show  that  from  the  earliest  times  there  has  ex- 
isted a  people  whom  no  man  can  remember,  that  have  earnestly  and 
consistently  contended  for  the  true  faith,  otice  delivered  to  the  saints. 
If  he  requires  me  to  put  my  finger  on  the  page  of  history  on  which  is 
f2  5 


66  DEBATE    ON   THE 

described  the  commencement  of  the  degeneracy  of  the  Roman  diocese 
from  the  true  faith,  I  will  turn  back  to  about  the  year  of  our  Lord  250. 
Then  the  controversy  between  Cornelius  and  Novatian,  about  the 
bishopric  of  Rome,  embraced  the  points  at  issue,  which  separated  tlie 
true  church  from  that  which  was  then  grievously  contaminated  with 
error  and  immorality.  It  was,  indeed,  a  controversy  about  the  purity 
of  communion  and  discipline,  rather  than  about  articles  of  doctrine. 
And  it  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  such  was  the  principal  issue  made  at 
that  time,  although  the  doctrine  of  Christianity  will  not  long  continue 
pure  in  a  degenerate  comnumity. 

I  have  here,  before  me,  Eusebius,  the  oldest  of  ecclesiastical  histo> 
rians,  who  informs  us  that  Novatus  and  his  party  were  called 
Cathari' ox  Puritans.  And,  although  he  appears  greatly  incensed  a- 
gainst  ^ovatus  and  his  party,  he  can  record  no  evil  against  them  ex- 
cept their  "  uncharilabkness,"  in  refusing  to  commune  with  those  of 
immoral  and  doubtful  character. 

The  gentleman  has  given  yoa  his  definition  of  orthodoxy  and  hete- 
rodoxy :  my  definition  is — the  strong  party  is  the  orthodox,  and  the 
weak  party  is  the  heterodox. 

I  hold  in  my  hand  one  of  the  latest  and  best  historians — Waddin|f- 
ton.  My  learned  opponent  has  already  introduced  him  to  your  ac- 
quaintance. He  is  a  Fellow  of  Trinity  college,  Cambridge,  and 
Prebendary  of  Ferring,  in  the  cathedral  church  of  Chichester.  The 
account  he  gives  of  these  reformers  is  sustained  by  Jones  and  other 
ecclesiastical  historians.  I  prefer  Waddington  for  his  brevity  and 
perspicuity.     He  says : 

"  We  may  conclude  with  some  notice  of  the  sect  of  the  Novatians  who  were 
stigmatized  at  the  time  both  as  schismatics  and  heretics;  but  who  may  perhaps 
be  more  properly  considered  as  the  earliest  body  of  ecclesiastical  reformers 
They  arose  at  Rome  about  the  year  250,  A.  D.  and  subsisted  until  the  fifth  cen 
tury  throughout  every  part  of  Christendom.  Novatian,  a  presbyter  of  Rome  was 
a  man  of  great  talents  and  learning,  and  of  character  so  austere,  that  he  was  un- 
willing, under  any  circumstances  of  contrition,  to  re-admit  those  who  had  beep 
once  separated  from  the  communion  of  the  church.  And  this  severitv  he  would 
have  extended  not  only  to  those  who  had  fallen  by  deliberate  transgression,  but 
even  to  such  as  had  made  a  forced  compromise  of  .their  faith  under  the  terrors  of 
persecution.  He  considered  the  christian  church  as  a  societv,  where  virtue  and 
innocence  reigned  universally,  and  refused  any  longer  to  acknowledge  as  mem- 
bers of  it,  those  who  had  once  degenerated  into  unrighteousness.  This  endea- 
vor to  revive  the  spotless  moral  purity  of  the  primitive  faith  was  found  inconsis- 
tent with  the  corruptions  even  of  that  early  age;  it  was  regarded  with  suspicion 
by  the  leading  prelates,  as  a  vain  and  visionary  scheme;  and  those  rigid  princi- 
ples which  had  characterized  and  sanctified  the  church  in  the  first  century,  were 
abandoned  to  the  profession  of  schismatic  sectaries  in  the  third." 

This  sounds  a  little  like  Protestantism.     Our  author  proceeds  : 

"  From  a  review  of  what  has  been  written  on  this  subject,  some  truths  may  be 
derived  of  considerable  historical  importance;  the  following  are  among  them  :— 
1.  In  the  midst  of  perpetual  dissent  and  occasional  controversv,  a  steady  and  dis- 
tinguishable line,  both  in  doctrine  and  practice,  was  maintained  by  the  early 
church,  and  its  eflbrts  against  those,  whom  it  called  heretics,  were  zealous  and 
persevering,  and  for  the  most  part  consistent.  Its  contests  were  fought  with  the 
•sword  of  the  spirit,'  with  the  arms  of  reason  and  eloquence;  and  as  they  were 
always  unattended  bv  personal  oppression,  so  were  they  most  effectually  success- 
fiil — success.ul,  not  m  establishing  a  nominal  unity,  nor  silencing  the  expression 
of  private  opinion,  but  in  maintaining  the  purity  of  the  faith,  in  preserving  the 
attachment  of  the  great  majority  of  the  bel'evers,  and  in  consigning,  either  Xo  im- 
mediate disrepute,  or  early  neglect,  all  the  utscriptural  doctrines  which  were 
luccessively  arrayed  against  it." 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC    KELIGIOfT.  67 

Other  truths  are  here  stated,  as  consequent  from  the  premises.  1 
will  however  for  the  satisfaction  of  my  Episcopalian  friends  read  what 
follows,  in  this  connection  on  church  government. 

"There  Has  yet  iio  dissent  on  the  subject  of  church  government.  It  was  uni- 
versally and  undisputably  Episcopal ;  even  the  reformer  Novatian,  after  his  ex- 
pul:>ioii  from  the  church,  assumed  the  direction  of  his  own  rigid  sect  under  the  ti- 
tle of  hishop;  and  if  any  dissatisfaction  had  existed  as  to  the  established  method 
of  directing  the  church,  it  would  certainly  have  displayed  itself  on  tlie  occasion 
of  a  schism,  which  entirily.  respected  matters  of  practice  and  discipline."  Hist, 
oftliechh.p.'i^. 

These  Puritans  or  reformers  spread  all  over  the  world,  and  continu- 
ed to  oppose  the  pretensions  of  those  who,  from  being  the  major  par- 
ty, claimed  to  be  the  Catholic  or  only  church.  They  continued  undei 
the  name  of  Novatians  for  more  than  two  centuries ;  but  finally  were 
merged  in  the  Donatists,  who,  indeed,  are  the  same  people  under  ano- 
ther name.  These  Donatists  were  a  very  large  and  proarperous  commu- 
nity. We  read  of  279  Donatist  bishops  in  one  African  council.  Of 
these  Donatists  the  same  historian  deposes : 

"The  Donatists  have  never  been  charged  with  the  slightest  show  of  truth 
with  any  error  of  doctrine,  or  any  defect  in  church  government  or  discipline,  or 
any  depravity  of  moral  practice  ;  they  agreed  in  every  respect  with  their  adver- 
saries, except  one — they  did  not  acknowledge  as  legitimate  the  ministry  of  the 
African  church,  but  considered  their  own  boay  to  be  the  true,  uncorrupted,  uni- 
versal church.'' 

Mark  it.  The  Donatists  considered  their  own  body  to  be  the  true, 
•jtttcorrupted,  universal  church.'  "It  is  quite  clear,"  our  author  pro- 
ceeds : 

"  It  is  quite  clear,  that  they  pushed  their  schism  to  very  great  extremities,  even 
to  that  of  rejecting  the  connnunion  of  all,  who  were  in  communion  with  the 
church  which  they  called  false  ;  but  this  was  the  extent  of  their  spiritual  otience, 
even  from  the  assertions  of  tlieir  enemies."      IVad.  Hist.  p.  154. 

The  Donatists,  in  some  two  centuries,  were  amalgamated  with  the 
Paulicians.  They,  too,  were  called  Puritans.  Jones,  who  has  been  at 
the  greatest  pains  to  give  tlj^ir  history,  gives  the  following  account  of 
them  : 

"  About  the  year  660,  a  new  sect  arose  in  the  east,  under  the  name  of  Pauu- 
CIANS,  which  is  justly  entitled  to  our  attention. 

"  In  Mananalis,  an  obscure  town  in  the  vicinity  of  Somosata,  a  person  of  the 
name  of  Constantine  entertained  at  his  house  a  deacon,  who  having  been  a  pris- 
oner among  the  Alahometans,  was  returning  from  Syria,  whither  he  had  been 
carried  away  captive.  F'rom  this  passing  stranger  Constantine  received  the  pre» 
cious  gift  ol  the  New  Testament  in  its  original  language,  which  even  at  this  ear- 
ly period,  was  so  concealed  from  the  vulgar,  that  Feter  Siculus,  to  whom  we  owe 
most  of  our  information  on  the  history  of  the  Paulicians,  tells  us  the  first  scruples 
of  a  Catholic,  when  he  was  advised  to  read  the  bible  was,  "it  is  not  lawful  forus 
profane  pei-sons  to  read  those  sacred  writings,  but  for  the  priests  only."  Indeed, 
the  gross  ignorance  which  pervaded  Europe  at  that  time,  rendered  the  generality 
CI  the  people  incapable  of  reading  tiiat  or  any  other  book;  but  even  those  of  the 
laity  who  could  read,  were  dissuaded  by  their  religious  guides  from  meddling  with 
the  Hible.  Constantine  however,  made  the  best  use  of  the  deacon's  present — he 
studied  the  New  Testament  with  unwearied  assiduity — and  more  particularly  the 
writings  of  the  apostle  Paul  from  which  he  at  length  endeavored  to  deduce  a  system 
of  doctrine  and  worship.  •  He  investigated  the  creed  of  primitive  Christianity.' 
gays  Gibbon,  '  and  whatever  might  be  the  success,  a  Protestant  reader  will  applaud 
the  spirit  of  the  enquiry.'  The  knowledge  to  which  Constantine  himself  was,  un- 
der the  divine  blessing  enabled  to  attain,  negladly  conmiunicated  to  others  around 
bim,  and  a  christian  church  was  collected.  In  a  little  time,  several  individuals 
arose  aniongtheni  qualified  forthework  of  the  ministry;  and  several  otherchurch- 
c.s  were  collected  throughout  Armenia  and  Cappaaocia.  It  appears  from  the 
whole  of  their  history,  to  have  been  a  leading  ob*«ct  with  Constantine  And  hii 


68  DEBATE    ON    THE 

brethren  (o  restore  as  far  as  possible  the  profession  of  christianitj  to  all  its  priia- 
itive  simplicity."     Jones'  Hist.  Christian  chh.  p.  239. 

Again  : 

"The  Paulician  teachers,"  says  Gibbon,  "were  distinguished  only  by  their 
scriptural  names,  by  the  modest  title  of  their  fellow  pilgrims  ;  by  the  austerity 
of  their  lives,  their  zeal  and  knowledge,  and  the  credit  of  some  extraordinary 
gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  they  were  incapable  of  desiring,  or  at  least,  of  ob- 
taining the  wealth  and  honors  of  the  Catholic  prelacy.  Such  anti-cbristian  pride 
the\-  strongly  censured." — Id.  ih.  p.  240. 

I  might  read  almost  to  the  same  effect  from  Waddington  and  D« 
Pin.  True  they  are  called  heretics  by  those  who  call  themselves  Ca- 
tiiolic  and  us  heretics ;  but  what  does  this  prove  ? 

Until  the  appearance  of  the  Waldenses  and  Albigenses,  these  Pro 
estants  continued  to  oppose  the  church  of  nations  in  the  east,  and  in 
the  west,  until  at  one  time  they  claimed  the  title  of  Catholic.  We 
read  of  hundreds  of  bishops  attending  the  different  councils  in  which 
they  met  to  oppose  the  violent  assaults  of  their  enemies. 

It  is  sometimes  difficult  to  say  which  were  the  more  numerous  party, 
those  in  communion  with  the  Cathari,  or  Puritans,  sometimes  called 
Novatians,  sometimes  Donatists,  sometimes  Paulicians,  sometimes 
Waldenses  ;  but  always,  in  fact,  Protestants. 

The  spirit  of  true  religion  seems  to  have  fled  from  Rome  from  the 
first  appearance  of  the  Novatians.  The  first  schism  at  Rome  acknow 
ledged  and  recorded  by  the  Roman  Catholic  historians,  is  that  which 
occurred  at  the  election  of  Cornelius  over  Novatus.  Hence  Novatus 
is  called  the  first  anti-pope.  Du  Pin  and  Barronius  amply  testify  of 
the  violence  by  which  St.  Peter's  chair  was  often  filled  with  a  vicar 
after  this  schism.  In  the  election  of  Damasus  many  were  killed  in  the 
churches  of  Rome.  One  hundred  and  thirty  four  persons,  beaten 
to  death  by  clubs,  were  carried  out  of  a  single  house  at  this  election. 
Had  the  Holy  Spirit  any  thing  to  do  in  thus  filling  the  chair  of  St.  Pe- 
ter with  a  vicar  of  Christ!  Is  the  church  which  permits  such  things 
and  which  has  been  sustained  by  such  means,  the  true  church  of  God  1 
Is  the  person  thus  elected,  the  supreme  head  of  Christ's  church^ 
the  proper  vicar  of  Christ! !  May  we  not  then  say  that  the  spirit  of 
God  on  that  day,  had  departed  from  Rome!  And  may  we  not  add, 
from  the  documents  before  us,  that  if  there  be  any  truth  in  history, 
we  have  found  a  succession  of  witnesses  for  the  ancient  faith  against 
Rome,  from  the  days  of  the  first  schism  till  the  present  hour  1 

There  is  but  another  point  in  the  speech  of  my  opponent,  to  which  I 
will  now  respond.  I  called  on  him  to  explain  the  difference  between 
the  claim  of  the  title  of  pope,  or  universal  father,  (as  St.  Gregory  op- 
posed it,)  and  the  same  claim  as  now  maintained  by  the  head  of  the 
church.  The  name  pope,  indeed,  has  in  modern  times,  much  changed 
its  meaning;  for  once  it  was  applied  to  all  bishops,  and  is  now  ap- 
plied to  every  priest  in  the  Greek  church.  But  when  has  the  title 
"universal  father,"  been  changed!  He  alluded,  in  reply,  to  the 
schism  between  the  Greek  church  and  the  Roman  church.  The  Greek 
church,  it  seems,  would  not  allow  that  the  ordinances  of  religion  with- 
out their  sanction,  were  validly  administered.  Is  not  that  the  very 
plea  of  Rome  at  this  hour?  Does  she  not  say,  that  the  bishops  and 
clergy  of  the  English  church  are  all  laymen,  because  >that  church  se-^ 
parated  from  the  Roman  church  ;  and  that  all  the  authority  she  had 
from  her  has  been  since  revoked  by  the  authority  that  gave  it  ?     How 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  69 

often  are  we  told  that  the  pope  has  the  power  of  resuming  all  authority 
given  him — that  he  can  create,  and  afterwards  destroy  ]  that  whatever 
ecclesiastical  power  he  gives,  he  can  take  away ;  and  that  therefore 
all  heretics  excommunicated  and  anathematized  have  no  power  left  to 
perform  the  ordinances  of  religion  1  The  ground  upon  which  the  gen- 
tleman stands  as  to  his  defence  of  the  authority  of  the  pope,  is  precise- 
ly the  ground  of  Gregory's  opposition  to  the  title,  as  claimed  by  Boni- 
face in.  if  I  can  understand  his  attempt  to  explain  it. 

But  I  must  advert,  before  I  sit  down,  to  a  single  point  on  which  I 
touched  in  my  speech  of  this  morning,  viz.  that  of  the  councils.  The 
gentleman  asks,  (fid  not  Sylvester  the  pope  preside  in  the  first  general 
council  by  his  legate  1  I  affirm  that  he  cannot  show  documents  to 
prove  that  fact.— Nay,  let  him  show,  if  he  can,  that  the  first  seven 
councils  were  called  by  the  bishops  of  Rome,  or  thai  his  legates  were 
there  to  preside. 

What  would  the  gentleman  prove  by  the  fact,  if  it  be  a  fact,  that  a 
Roman  bishop  presided  over  one  of  these  councils  1  That,  therefore, 
they  were  Roman  councils  1  How  would  such  logic  pass  with  us  with 
regard  to  the  house  of  representatives  1  His  argument  runs  thus  :  Mr. 
Henry  Clay  was  once  speaker  of  that  house,  Mr.  Clay  is  from  Ken- 
lucky,  therefore,  the  house  of  representatives  were  all  Kentuckians  ! 
This  would  be  exactly  the  pith  of  the  logic  we  have  heard. 

My  opponent  admits  the  history  of  the  first  seven  councils  which  I 
have  given  to  be  correct:  but  explains  it  by  asserting  that  all  the  busi- 
ness was  eastern.  But  there  were  western  heresies,  as  well  as  eastern, 
and  western  business  as  well  as  eastern  transacted  in  these  councils. 
I  therefore  object  to  his  exposition  of  that  matter.  It  would  have  been 
impolitic  on  his  exposition  to  call  together  eastern  men  to  decide 
upon  eastern  heresies.  They  ought  to  have  sent  western  men,  who 
would  have  been  more  impartial  judges.  But  he  has  not  yet  adduced 
one  document,  showing  that  these  councils  were  called  for  such  purpo- 
ses, or  that  the  east  only  was  concerned  in  these  q   estions. 

On  the  prefix  "  Catholic"  to  the  epistles,  the  gentleman  did  not 
hear  me,  or  did  not  apprehend  my  meaning.  The  argument  is  not  a- 
bout  its  antiquity  hnt  Its  aiithority .'  He  has  not  proved,  and  cannot 
prove  that  it  was  so  prefixed  in  the  first  ages,  nor  that  it  was  ever  so 
applied  by  any  inspired  writer.  Having  brought  no  documents  to 
prove  this,  his  reasoning  is  wholly  irrelevant. 

But  you  have  been  treated,  my  friends,  to  a  feast  from  the  ^^  Baptist 
Banner,"  one  of  the  party  ephemerals  opposed  to  reformation.  Un- 
fortunately for  the  cause  of  religion,  every  age  has  produced  a  crop  of 
these  special  pleaders  for  party  tenets.  Many  such  a  banner  was  un- 
furled against  Martin  Luther,  John  Calvin,  John  Wesley  and  all  re- 
formers :  for  they  were  all  heretics  and  controversialists.  Indeed  there 
never  was  a  good  man  on  earth  who  was  not  a  controversialist.  From 
the  days  of  Abel  and  Noah  till  the  present  hour,  the  friends  of  truth 
have  been  heretical  and  controversial.  But  what  has  the  Baptist  Ban- 
ner to  do  with  tue  present  points  at  issue  1  Is  the  gentleman  so  hard 
fressed  as  to  form  such  alliances,  to  deliver  himself  or  cause  from  ruin  1 
trust  he  will  either  keep,  or  be  kept  to  the  question  in  debate,  and 
leave  Protestants  to  settle  their  own  controversies. — [Time  ex- 
j-'jed.] 


70  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Twelve  o'clock,  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

I  thought  we  should  be  placed  under  considerable  obligations  fo  my 
friend,  for  putting  his  finger  upon  the  historic  page  that  records  the 
day  and  date  of  the  apostacy  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church  from  the 
true  and  holy  Apostolic  church,  wilh  so  much  precision.  But  now  we 
are  adjourned  back  nearly  1000  years,  and  yet  nothing  more  definite 
than  a  "  some  time  about  the  year  250  !"  Some  time  about !  He 
does  not  tell  us  whether  it  was  in  one  year,  or  another,  that  the  church 
began  to  be  corrupt.  It  was  some  time  about,  and  so  on.  About  this 
time,  it  seems,  the  Novatians  separated  from  the  church — well,  Paul 
foresaw  that  such  events  would  occur  in  the  church's  history-^he 
foresaw  that  "  ravenous  wolves  would  enter  the  fold  ;"  that  dissensions 
would  exist,  at  all  successive  perioffs,  to  the  end  of  time— that  every 
day  new  heretics  would  start  up,  who  would  deny  the  truth,  introduce 
false  doctrine,  and  trouble  the  people  of  God.  The  Novatians  were 
one  of  these  sects — and  what  did  they  teach  1  Why  the  most  revolt- 
ing and  horrible  doctrines;  among  others,  the  doctrine  that  a  convert 
to  Christianity,  who,  in  times  of  peril  and  temptation,  nay  even  when 
compelled  by  physical  force,  should  forsake  his  creed,  could  never  be 
restored,  no  matter  how  sincerely  penitent.  Who  that  feels  his  frailty 
and  knows  that  his  heart  in  an  evil  hour  might  stray  from  duty,  does 
not  revolt  at  such  a  doctrine,  that  for  one  offence  would  cut  him  off 
forever!  God  dealt  not  so  with  Adam,  nor  Christ  with  Peter,  when 
at  the  voice  of  a  woman,  and  in  an  evil  hour,  even  his  strong  heart 
failed  him.  He  admitted  him  to  mercy,  received  him  back  to  his 
bosom,  and  made  him  the  rock  of  his  church. 

But  if  all  heretics  are  right,  and  this  among  the  number — if  the 
church  was  wrong  in  separating  herself  from  these  men — if  it  is  her 
duty  to  say  to  the  upholder  of  false  doctrine  "all  hail,"  you  areas 
free  from  error,  as  incorrupt  and  immaculate,  as  we  are,  come  partake 
with  us,  we  are  of  one  communion;  the  rule  shotild,  according  to  the 
gentleman's  logic,  work  both  ways,  and  Rome  has  as  good  a  right  as 
anyother  to  be  called  th*}  church  of  Christ.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the 
Novatians  were  right,  as  he  says  they  were,  in  excluding  others,  the 
church  was  right  in  excluding  them.  The  speech  of  heretics,  St.  Paul 
tells  us,  2d  Tim.  ii.  17,  spreadeth  like  a  cancer;  he  elsewhere  says, 
that  evil  communication  corrupts  good  manners;  and  the  Pagans  were 
not  'nsensible  to  the  wisdom  of  the  distich — 

"  Frincipiis  ohsta  ;  sero  niedicina  paratur 
"Cum  iiialai  per  lons^as  iuvaluere  moras." 

My  friend  must  have  forgotten  his  argument  of  this  morning,  when 
he  said  that  the  church  of  the  livmg  God  should  include  none  but  the 
pure  and  holy.  If  this  be  true,  we  must  all  give  it  up ;  for  who  is  holy  t 
Which  of  us  can  lay  his  hand  upon  his  heart  and  say  I  am  without 
sin?  No,  we  are  only  holy  in  acknowledging  our  sinfulness  and  guilt 
in  the  sight  of  God,  with  humility  and  prayer.  "  If  we  say  we  have 
no  sin,  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us!  If  we  say 
we  have  not  sinned,  we  make  him  a  liar,  and  his  word  is  not  in  us.  If 
we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to 
clear  us  from. all  iniquity."  St.  .John,  F]p.  If  such  be  the  gentleman's  re- 
quisitions, there  can  be  no  church  of  Christ  in  this  erring  world.  There 
is  none  pure  from  defilement,  says  Job,  and  all  are  included  as  the 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    HELIGION,  71 

objects  of  divine  displeasure,  from  which  only  the  blood  of  Christ, 
with  faith,  repentance  and  good  works,  can  save  us.  If  the  gentleman 
insists  on  applying  a  test  which  would  require  absolute  perfection  to 
enable  us  to  endure  it,  there  is  no  such  holiness,  that  1  am  aware  of, 
exhibited  in  this  probationary  state.  My  friend  may  feel  a  proud  con- 
sciousness that  he  is  a  happy  instance  of  its  existence,  but  for  my  part, 
1  cannot,  I  should  not  think  it  safe  to  lay  the  flattering  unction  to  my 
soul.  I  would  advise  no  man  to  do  so,  while  the  great  St.  Paul  com- 
mands us  to  work  out  our  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling;  and  tells 
us,  he  chastised  his  own  body,  lest  while  he  preached  to  others  he 
himself  "  should  become  a  reprobate,"  1st.  Cor.  ix.  27.  It  is  our  duty 
to  acknowledge  that  we  are  frail  and  sinful  mortals  even  like  the  rest 
of  men.  Establish  a  contrary  rule,  and  pride  digs  one  abyss  after 
another  beneath  our  feet,  and  there  will  not  be  left  one  virtuous  feeling, 
one  sound  principle  upon  which  we  can  take  our  stand  to  make  a 
last  appeal  to  heaven  for  mercy  !  When  Clirist  empowered  the  church 
to  throw  her  nets  into  the  sea  of  human  life,  as  the  apostles  did  into 
,  the  lake,  she  gathered  into  it  fishes,  both  good  and  bad  ;  when  the  nets 
are  hauled  ashore,  the  good  fish  will  be  selected  and  the  bad  thrown 
back  into  the  sea.  So  will  it  be  at  the  end  of  the  world.  The  angels 
of  God  will  come  forth  and  select  the  elect  from  the  reprobate — they 
will  gather  the  wheat  into  the  garner,  but  the  tares  they  will  burn 
with  unquenchable  fire.  The  Catholic  church  with  a  consciousness  of 
man's  true  condition  in  this  life,  and  a  liberality  which  does  her  honor, 
and  which,  all  agree,  ought  to  belong  to  the  fold  of  Christ,  permits  all  to 
•join  in  her  religious  festivals  and  exterior  communion  who  profess  the 
same  faith,  and  are  willing  to  submit  to  her  decisions  as  her  children. 
But  mark  the  distinction  between  the  body  and  the  soul  of  the  church, 
all  who  profess  the  true  faith,  assist  at  the  same  religious  exercises 
and  obey  the  same  pastors,  belong  to  the  body  of  the  church  and  are 
therefore  numbered  among  her  children  ;  but  to  faith  and  exterior  com- 
munion of  which  alone  man  can  take  cognizance,  must  be  added  hope  and 
love  and  grace  with  God,  that  we  may  belong  to  the  soul  of  the  church. 
Of  the  latter  the  church  does  not  undertake  to  decide.  This  she  leaves 
to  God  who  alone  can  see  the  heart.  She,  herself,  judges  not  the  in- 
scrutable things  of  the  spirit  of  a  man,  but  contents  herself  with  know- 
ing and  teaching  that  nothing  can  escape  the  piercing  and  all-seeing 
eye  of  God,  who  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  works,  on 
that  day  when  the  hope  of  the  hypocrite  shall  perish.  Hence,  as  long 
as  one  of  her  members  disqualifies  not  himself  for  the  communion  of 
the  faithful  by  flagrant  impiety  notorious  depravity,  or  scandalous 
excess,  she  rejects  him  not;  but  lik^  that  charity  of  which  St.  Paul 
speaks,  1st  Cor.  xiii.  "is  patient,  is  kind,  thinketh  no  evil,  rejoiceth 
not  in  iniquity,  but  rejoiceth  with  the  truth,  believeth  all  things,  hopeth 
all  things,  endureth  all  things,  with  modesty  admonishing  men,  if  per- 
adventure  God  may  give  them  repentance." 

The  gentleman  quoted  from  Waddington  the  history  of  the  Nova- 
tians.  He  says,  they  continued,  how  long  I  know  not,  but  till  ! 
(tbrget  not  the  word,)  iiU  ihey  merged  in  the  sect  of  Donatists.  The 
expressive  word  till  is  enough.  There  js  no  such  fatal  and  terminating 
word  in  Catholic  history.  The  Catholic  church  is  universal,  and  not 
sectarian.  It  is  perpetual  in  duration,  and  is  not  merged  as  one  wave 
of  error  is  merg."!  in  or  obliterated  by  another.     The  gentleman  asserts. 


72  DEBATE    ON    THE 

that  the  Donntists  did  not  differ  from  the  Novatians.  This  is  incor- 
rect. The  Donatists  fell  from  schism  into  errors  which  the  No- 
vatians had  never  adopted.  They  employed  the  "  savage  Ctrcum- 
ce/Mons,"  as  the  protestant  historian  Waddington  calls  them,  to 
pillacre  churches,  murder  Catholics,  and  perpetrate  other  acts  of 
barbarity  unheard  of  among  the  meek  followers  of  Jesus  Christ. 
What,  too,  will  my  friend  say  to  the  uncontrollable  propensity  to  sui' 
cide,  which  they  were  accused  of  encouraging  and  indulging  with 
dreadful  frequency?  Not  so  the  true  church — she  comes  like  Jesus 
Christ  to  call  sinners  to  repentance,  and  heal  the  contrite  of  heart — 
«lie  employs  his  own  inviting,  and  attractive,  accents  of  pity  and 
compassion  : — "  Come  to  me  all  you  that  labor  and  are  heavy  bur- 
dened, and  /will  refresh  you,  not  drive  you  to  despair,  to  acts  of  self 
destruction;  and  you  shall  find  rest  for  your  souls."  Matthew  xi.  28. 
A  hard  heart  will  fare  badly  in  the  end,  says  the  scripture,  and  conse- 
quently every  feeling  of  justice  and  humanity  revolts  at  the  idea  that 
the  Novatians  could  have  been  animated  by  the  meek  spirit  of  Jesus 
Christ,  when  they  condemned  to  eternal  exclusion  from  the  church  for 
a  single,  and  that,  frequently,  a  compulsory  fault,  as  when  an  individ- 
ual was  condemned  by  brute  force  to  offer  incense  to  the  idols,  or  the 
Donatists,  who  revolted  against  the  authority  of  the  African  bishops, 
and  ravaged  the  countries  where  they  prevailed  with  a  lawless  soldiery. 
Is  this  the  meek  church  of  him  who  came  to  preach  deliverance  to 
captives  1  Must  we  palliate  these  and  a  hundred  similar  excesses,  to 
criminate  a  church  which  would,  if  her  mild  counsels  were  obeyed,  have 
averted  these  evils  from  mankind  ■?  Is  it  candid,  is  it  just,  to  blame  her 
without  cause  and  to  withhold  praise  where  it  is  due  1  The  Roman 
Catholic  church  has  never  given  the  example  of  such  cruelty.  She 
o.n  the  contrary  admits  all  sinners  to  repentance,  she  counts  as  bclonu^ing 
to  her  communion,  all  the  children  baptized  in  Protestant  communions 
who  die  before  they  are  capable  of  committing  mortal  sin,  or  who  living 
in  invincible  ignorance  that  they  have  been  bred  up  in  error,  keep 
the  commandments  of  God,  and  love  him,  as  far  as  their  knowledge  of 
his  divine  nature  will  permit.  All  these  belong  to  the  soul  of  the 
church ;  and  are  consequently  among  the  most  precious  of  her  fold. 
Even  among  the  unenlightened  Indians  if  any  there  be  that  keep  inviola- 
bly the  natural  law  and  serve  their  Creator  according  to  the  best  lights 
•which  they  possess,  these  she  enrolls  among  her  children,  and  teaches 
us  to  consider  them  as  ol'jects  of  God's  special  mercy,  whom  he  will 
not,  according  to  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  fail  to  illustrate  with  the  light 
of  divine  ^truth.  For  this  purpose  the  resources  of  his  wisdom,  are 
like  that  wisdom,  infinite.  Thus  while  the  Catholic  church  watches 
with  the  most  scrupulous  fidelity  over  the  purity  of  faith,  in  her 
has  the  beautiful  saying  of  the  psalmist  been  fulfilled,  "  Mercy  and 
truth  have  met  one  another,  justice  and  peace  have  kissed."  Ps. 
Ixxxiv.  11. 

By  what  ingenuity  can  the  gentleman  flatter  himself  he  will  estab- 
lish the  claims  of  the  discordant  and  evanescent  sects  of  these  early 
ages  to  the  title  of  Catholics.  Sisyphus-like,  these  sects  which  he  is 
laboring  so  hard,  so  vainly,  to  roll  up  to  the  summit  of  that  "moun- 
tain placed  upon  the  top  of  mountains,"  spoken  of  by  Is.  ii.  2. 
and  which  is  the  aptest  figure  of  the  Catholic  church,  to  which  all  na- 
tions flow,  will  fall   upon  him   and  crush  him.     He  can  never  prove 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  73 

them  Catholic  in  time,  in  place,  or  in,  doctrine.  The  Novatia^s  did 
not  slip  into  the  Donatists,  nor  the  Donatists  into  the  Paulicians  ;  there 
was  no  common  bond  of  union,  no  identity  of  doctrine,  among  these 
heterogeneous  sects.  As  it  is  the  same  sun  which  took  its  station  in 
the  heavens  at  the  creation  that  now  shines  over  us,  so  it  is  the  same 
reliffion  that  was  taught  eighteen  hundred  years  ago  by  Jesus  Christ, 
that  irradiates  us  at  this  very  day  with  the  light  of  truth  ;  and  not  more 
difficult  would  it  be  to  count  all  the  vapors,  mists  and  clouds,  that 
passed  athwart  the  bright  luminary  of  day  since  he  first  gladdened  the 
universe  with  his  beams,  than  to  enumerate  the  numberless  sects  that 
have  cast  their  shadows  on  the  light  of  Catholic  holiness,  and  purity, 
and  truth,  since  the  origin  of  Christianity.  They  have  passed,  or  are 
fast  passing  away  for  ever,  while  she  lasts  on,  and  will  last  till  the  end 
of  time.  "  I  have  seen  the  wicked,"  says  the  Psalmist,  xxxvi.  35, 
•'  highly  exalted,  and  lifted  up  like  the  cedars  of  Lebanon.  And  I 
passed,  and  lo !  he  was  not,  and  his  place  was  not  to  be  found."  This 
is  a  glorious  indication  of  the  stability  of  the  Catholic  church — of  the 
truth  of  the  power  that  sustains  her.  And  as  she  signalized  her 
triumph  over  all  the  false  gods  of  Paganism,  by  establishing  the 
church  of  All  Saints,  and  of  the  God  who  made  them  saints,  on  the 
ruins  of  the  greatest  of  idolatrous  temples,  so  does  she  signalize  her 
triumph  over  all  sects  and  heresies,  falsely  professing  to  be  christian, 
by  the  august  pontiff  who  speaks  to  the  eternal  city  and  the  Catholic 
world.  From  the  inspiration  of  scripture,  and  of  splendid  facts,  I  pass 
to  the  inspiration  of  poetry,  I  care  not  whose,  and  close  the  words  of 
my  argument  in  the  words  of  Byron : 

"  But  thou  of  temples  old,  or  altars  new, 
Standest  alone — with  nothing  like  to  thee — 
Worthiest  of  God,  the  holv  and  the  true! 
Since  Zion's  desolation,  when  that  He 
Forsook  his  former  city,  what  could  be 
Of  earthly  structures  in  his  honor  pil'd 
Of  a  sublimer  aspect  ?     Majestv, 
Power,  glory,  strength,  and  be<.:itv,  all  are  aisl'd, 
*  In  this  eternal  ark  of  worship  undefil'd." 

»  *  »  «  » 

My  friend  has  dwelt  eloquently  upon  riots  in  the  church  in  particu- 
lar seasons  of  excitement.  But  shall  a  society  forfeit  all  claims  to 
regard,  because,  in  seasons  of  high  excitement,  differences  of  opinion 
proceed  to  violence?  or  a  few  bad  people  come  to  blows'?  It  has 
happened,  and  may  happen  among  all  denominations,  even  the  most 
peaceful  sects,  and  everybody  of  men ;  (instances  were  here  specified.) 
A  riot  may  take  place  at  an  election  of  president,  and  blood  be  shed  ', 
but  does  this  affect  the  title  of  chief  magistrate  of  this  union  1  Is  he 
to  lose  his  office  because  blows  were  struck  during  the  election?  and 
if  the  pope  could  not  always  be  elected  peaceably,  by  reason  of  the 
disturbances  created  by  men,  was  the  succession  to  cease,  and  was 
there  never  to  be  a  pope  again,  or  a  bishop,  or  any  other  pastor  in  the 
church  ■?  was  Christ  not  God  because  Peter,  the  servant  Malchus,  sjied 
blood  for  him?  See  the  terrible  effects  of  my  friend's  bad  reasoning. 
The  deist  has  availed  himself  of  it,  and  denied  the  God  of  the  Old 
Testament,  because  exterminating  wars,  as  we  there  read,  were  waged 
at  his  command.  We  must  make  allowances  for  the  passions  and 
G  10 


74  DEBATE    Cnv    THE 

weaKnesses  of  human  nature ;  but  the  aim  of  relig^ion  is  to  correct,  fO 
heal,  if  she  cannot  entirely  remove  them.  When  the  pope  was  (fleeted, 
in  the  case  alluded  to,  he  restored  order.  As  Christ  said  to  Peter,  so 
said  he  to  the  mob  excited  by  Novatian,  "  Put  up  agsm  thy  sword 
into  its  place,  for  all  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the  sword." 
Matthew  xxvi.  52. 

The  gentleman  asked  me  to  tell  him  in  what  objectionable  sense  the 
bishop  of  Constantinople  claimed  the  title  of  Universal  Father.  Ik 
was  in  a  sense  never  used  before;  he  had  no  title  to  it;  he  assumed 
too  much  in  claiming  it.  Again,  it  was  he  who  pretended  that  no 
sacrament  could  be  administered  but  by  his  authority.  The  Catholic 
church  teaches  that,  however  itliallif  he  may  exercise  it,  no  antliority 
on  earth  can  take  even  from  a  degraded  priest  the  power  of  consecrat- 
ing. Schismatical  bishops,  when  duly  ordained  themselves,  could 
ordain  bishops,  priests  and  inferior  clergy.  We  admit  the  baptism 
of  Methodists  and  Baptists  by  aspersion,  or  immersioB,  as  I  have- 
already  explained  ;  and  even  the  orders  of  the  English  Episcopal 
church  are  contested,  on  the- ground  of  the  very  serious  doubt  whether 
the  first  of  their  bishops  was,  himself,  consecrated  by  a  brsbop,  or 
if  so,  by  a  valid  formulary. 

My  friend  was  not  at  all  accurate  in  stating  the  number  of  bishops 
present  at  some  of  the  first  councils.  There  were  more  present  at 
them,  as  I  can  easily  shew,  than  he  has  stated.  He  draws  a  parallel 
Detween  the  council  of  Nice  and  the  house  of  representatives.  I  do 
not  understand  the  force  of  his  analogy.  If  that  council  belonged  ex 
clusively  to  the  Greeks,  why  did  they  permit  a  Latin  to  preside!  But 
it  was  to  shew  the  world  that  they  admitted  the  authority  of  Rome 
that  Osius,  the  pope's  legate,  presided — ^and  without  his  signature, 
and  the  pope's  approbation,  their  acts  would  have  had  no  force  as  rules 
of  Catholic  faith.  What  analogy  is  there  between  Henry  Clay  and 
Osius?  Did  they  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  their  respective  assem- 
blies 1  Did  they  ever  dream  that  they  would  be  placed  in  juxta  posi- 
tion 1  If  the  speaker  of  the  house,  or  the  president  of  the  senate,  were 
to  object  to  the  passing  of  a  law,  would  his  veto  avail  anything  ? 
would  not  the  majority  rule? 

My  friend  said,  first,  that  Catholic  was  a  new  term ;  and  next,  when 
he  found  it  impossible  to  prove  that,  insisted  it  was  not  used  to  designate 
the  church,  by  inspired  writers.  I  have  abundantly  disproved  both 
of  these  assertions.  The  apostles  were  inspired  writers,  and  it  dates 
from  their  time;  and  they  alone,  according  to  the  rule  of  St.  Augustin, 
had  the  right  to  institute  it.  Besides,  what  are  all  the  glorions  pro- 
phesies of  the  universal  diffusion  of  the  church  by  Isaiah,  &c.  &c.  but 
the  evidence  that  it  should  be  what  its  naiije  imports?  In  fact,  it  was 
Catholic  before  all  the  New  Testament  Was  completed.  And  the 
apostles,  aware  of  che  doubts  that  error  would  originate  on  the  autho- 
rity of  the  church,  gave  a  sure  and  unerring  guide  to  every  sincere  be- 
liever, teaching  him  to  say,  next  after  the  profession  of  his  belief  in  God 
himself — not,  1  believe  in  the  bible — it  is  not  once  mentioned — not  in 
any  sect — there  were  none  heard  of  at  that  time — but  "I  believe  in  th« 
holy  Catholic  church.'^ — [Time  expired."l 


ROMAN    CTATHOLIC    RELIGION.  75 

Three  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Mr.  CA:\rPBELI.  rises — 

I  may  have  mistaken  in  ascribing  to  the  bishop  of  Rome  what  was 
done  by  the  bishop  of  Constantinople,  in  reference  to  the  personal 
consecration  of  the  successor  of  Mauritius ;  but  this  does  not  affect 
the  justice  of  my  remark,  or  invalidate  my  reasoning :  and  I  think 
my  worthy  friend  apprehends  this,  inasmuch  as  the  consecration  was 
approved  and  sustained  by  Gregory.  I  read  those  documents  at  the 
same  time,  and  may  have  confounded  them,  but  we  shall  hear  them 
again  and  see  how  much  is  either  gained  or  lost  by  the  admission. 

"  As  a  subject  and  a  christian,  it  was  the  duty  of  Gregory  to  acquiesce  in  the 
established  government,  but  the  joyful  applause  with  which  he  salutes  the  for- 
tune of  the  assassin,  has  sullied  with  incltlible  disgrace  the  character  of  the 
saint.  The  successor  of  the  apostles  might  have  inculcated  with  decent  firm- 
ness the  guilt  of  blood,  and  the  necessity  of  repentance  :  he  is  content  to  cele- 
brate the  deliveranre  of  the  people  and  the  fall  of  the  oppressor;  to  rejoice  that 
the  piety  and  benignity  of  Pnocas  have  been  raised  by  providence  to  the  impe- 
rial throne;  to  pray  that  his  hands  may  be  strengthened  against  all  his  enemies; 
and  to  expres?  a  wish,  perhaps  a  prophecy,  that,  after  a  long  and  triumphant 
reign,  he  may  be  transferred  from  a  temporal  to  an  everlasting  kingdom."* — 
Gihbon  Hist.  Dec.  and  Fall  Rom.  Emp.  vol.  viii.  p.  211. 

Now  this,  if  I  mistake  not,  amounts  in  substance  to  my  affirmation. 
Gregory  approved  the  usurpation,  and  sanctioned  the  induction  into 
office  of  a  man  who  had  wrested  the  throne  from  the  legitimate  master, 
and  who  was  both  a  murderer  and  a  usurper. 

I  could  wish  that  my  opponent  would  select  some  of  the  great  points 
of  my  argument  in  his  replies,  and  form  an  issue  with  me.  Were  this 
piece  of  history  blotted  out  of  existence,  what  loss  to  the  main  argu- 
ment] These  are  merely  incidental  and  minor  matters — illustrations 
rather  than  proofs,  and  leave  the  great  facts  as  they  were.  I  must, 
however,  briefly  glance  at  some  other  little  things  before  I  resume  my 
argument. 

The  gentleman's  next  remark  was,  "  that  Joshua  was  the  successor 
of  Moses."  True  it  is,  that  every  man  is  in  one  sense  successor  to 
some  one  who  preceded  him.  But  Moses  was,  for  a  time,  captain, 
prophet,  priest,  and  king  of  Jeshurun.  Joshua,  however,  merely  com- 
manded the  people,  and  divided  the  land  of  Canaan  among  them.  This 
did  not  Moses :  Moses  accomplished  all  that  he  was  appointed  to  do. 
He  needed  no  successor  in  the  peculiar  work  assigned  him.  They 
were  both  extraordinary  offices.  Moses  was  a  law-giver,  and  Joshua 
a  savior.  The  law  was  given  to  the  people  by  Moses  :  Joshua  gave 
them  an  inheritance.  Neither  of  them,  in  the  nature  of  things,  could 
have  a  successor  in  the  same  office,  for  its  duties  were  all  discharged. 

I  was  pleased  to  hear  the  gentleman  admit  all  that  I  said  concerning 
the  Novatians.  They  had  one  fault  which  we  both  allow — they  were 
too  severe  in  one  branch  of  discipline — they  could  never  receive  those 
who  had  grievously  fallen — no  repentance  would  obtain  re-admission 
if  the  penitent  had  very  flagrantly  sinned.     The  occasion  was  this ; 

*  Gregor.  1.  xi.  epist.  38,  indict,  vi.  Benignitatem  vestrae  pietatis  ad  impo- 
riale  fastigiam  pervenisse  g^audemus.  Lfetentur  Cfeli  et  exultet  terra,  et  de 
/e.stris  benignis  acribus  universae  reipublicje  populus  nunc  usque  vehementer 
afHictus  hilarrscat,  &c.  This  base  flattery,  the  topic  of  Protestant  invective,  it 
justly  censured  by  the  philosopher  Bayle,  (Dictionnaire  Critique,  Gregoire  1 
JVot.'  H.  torn.  ii.  p.  597,  598.)  Cardinal  Barronius  justifies  the  pope  at  the  er- 
jjeiise  of  the  fallen  emperor. 


76  DEBATE    ON    THE 

In  the  interim  of  the  Pagan  persecutions,  many  new  converts  were 
added  lo  the  churches.  By  and  by,  when  the  storm  of  persecution 
arose,  they  withdrew  and  fell  away:  but  when  a  calm  ensued,  they 
sought  to  be  restored  to  the  church.  The  >Jovatians  opposed  their 
restoration ;  the  other  party  contended  for  it.  The  Puritans  got  vexed 
"With  the  frequent  indulgences  and  backslidings  of  such  professors; 
and  this  occasioned  that  extreme  on  their  part,  which  drew  down  upon 
them  many  anathemas  from  the  other  party.  They  had  other  objec- 
tions besides  this  against  the  opposing  party;  but  this  was  sufficient 
for  a  division. 

I  was  sorry  to  hear  the  gentleman  excusing  the  church  for  embrac- 
ing in  its  bosom  men  of  every  sort  of  wickedness.  He  spoke  with 
great  feeling  and  eloquence  upon  the  subject  of  calling  ourselves  holy, 
&c.  We  admit  that  there  is  no  man  free  from  all  pollution,  whose 
heart  is  always  and  only  pure.  But  what  has  this  to  do  wi^h  the 
openly  wicked  and  profane — reprobates  of  the  deepest  dye !  Ought 
the  church  to  open  her  doors  as  wide  as  the  human  race,  and  admit 
every  human  being  without  discrimination?  Is  there  no  medium] 
He  quoted  the  parable  of  the  tares  and  wheat.  It  is  true,  th^  Savior 
commanded  to  let  the  tares  and  wheat  grow  together  till  harvest :  but 
the  gentleman  assunied  that  it  was  spoken  of  the  church-  I  admit  the 
doctrine,  as  applied  to  the  world.  "  The  field  is  the  world"  not  the 
church,  said  the  Savior.  Does  this  excuse  us  for  tolei&ting  reprobates 
in  the  bosom  of  the  church?  "You  are  not  of  this  toiI  i,"  says  the 
Savior  to  his  disciples — "  My  kingdom  is  not  of  this  '/"oild,"  "  Come 
out  from  among  them,  and  separate  yourselves,  and  I  will  receive  you, 
says  the  Almighty  Father.  What  concord  hia  Chiwt  with  Belial,  or 
he  that  believethwith  an  infideH" 

As  to  the"continuation  of  the  Novatians  till  the  Donatists,  and  the 
Donatists  till  the  Paulicians,"  &c.  my  friend  emphasizes  the  word  till, 
as  if  those  witnesses  for  Christ  had  died  away  when  some  new  sect 
arose.  The  fact  is,  that  when  some  great  leader  arose,  his  name  was 
imposed  upon  all  that  associated  with  him;  and  different  leaders,  in 
various  parts  of  the  world,  moved  great  masses  of  professors,  who 
were  essentially  the  same  people;  and  when  they  became  acquainted 
with  each  other,  they  coalesced  under  one  great  profession,  variously 
nicknamed  by  the  opposite  party.  So  are  the  Lutherans,  Calvinists, 
Wesleyans,  Cameronians,  &c.  of  our  own  time. 

Sorry  was  I  to  hear  my  liberal  antagonist  compare  the  Protestant 
sects  to  ihe  psalmist's  description  of  a  prosperous  wicked  man — "I 
saw,"  says  lie,  "the  wicked  great  in  power,  spread  himself  like  a 
green  bay  tree:  he  passed  away;  yea,  he  was  not.  I  sought  him,  and 
he  could  not  be  found."  I  do  not  know  how  his  Episcopalian  friends 
will  thank  him  for  this  compliment.  I  have  no  doubt  in  this  he  was 
sincere,  for  the  Romanists  often  bewailed  the  long  life  of  Elizabeth, 
because,  under  her  reign,  a  new  race  of  Protestants  was  born  and  edu- 
cated, and  alienated  from  the  Roman  hierarchy,  who  were  proof  against 
all  the  machinations  of  Rome.  They  hoped  that  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copalians would,  like  the  green  bay  tree  of  David,  (emblem  of  the 
prosperous  wicked,)  have  withered  away,  and  been  reabsorbed  by  the 
mother  church ;  but  for  once  the  application  failed,  and  the  wicked 
Protestants  have  for  three  centuries  grown  and  increased,  in  de- 
spite of  all  the  policy  and  effort  of  Rome,  and  are  now  in  expectation 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  77 

of  seeing  the  same  37th  psalm  verified  in  the  fates  of  Roman  Catho- 
licism. 

Every  sect  and  individual,  as  I  said  before,  is  passive  in  re- 
ceiving a  name.  Sectarian  names  are  generally  given  in  the  way  of 
reproach ;  thus  the  disciples  were  first  called  christians  at  Antioch, 
most  probably  in  derision ;  yet  it  was  a  very  proper  name.  Call  us 
what  you  please,  however,  it  does  not  change  nature  or  race.  The 
disciples  of  Christ  are  the  same  race,  call  them  Christians,  Nazarenes, 
Galileans,  Novatians,  Donatists,  Paulicians,  Waldenses,  Albigenses, 
Protestants,  or  what  you  please.  A  variety  of  designation  affects  not 
the  fact  which  we  allege ;  we  can  find  an  unbroken  series  of  Protes- 
tants— a  regular  succession  of  those  who  protested  against  the  corrup- 
tions of  the  Roman  church,  and  endeavored  to  hold  fast  the  faith  onco 
delivered  to  the  saints,  from  the  first  schism  in  the  year  250,  A.  D.  to 
the  present  day  ;  and  you  may  apply  to  them  what  description  or  de 
signation  you  please. 

The  gentleman  spoke  of  these  sects  as  waves  passing  by  while  the 
true  church  remained  like  a  wall,  immoveable  and  unchangeable. 
History  refuses  him  her  suffrage  in  this  assumption  :  for  it  deposes 
that  she  has  changed,  in  whole,  or  in  part,  her  tenets  and  her  disci- 
pline, no  less  than  eighteen  times  in  all — that  is,  once,  at  least  for 
every  general  council.  She  is  the  mutable  immutable  church,  con- 
tending for  uniformity  in  faith  and  variety  of  discipline. 

My  opponent  has  quoted  the  apostles'  creed.  Du  Pin,  and  a  learn- 
ed host  prove  that  the  apostles  never  wrote  it.  The  doctrine  contained 
in  it,  I  admit  is  apostolic.  And  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  like  all 
old  creeds,  it  states  facts  ;  whereas  modern  creeds  are  human  exposi- 
tions of  doctrines.  For  my  own  part,  I  can  adopt  every  article  of  that 
creed,  ex  ammo ;  except,  perhaps,  I  would  change  one  expression,  and 
say  that  '  I  believe  in  a  Catholic  church.'  I  believe  that  there  does 
exist  such  a  thing  as  a  truly  Catholic  church  of  Christ.  But  as  for 
human  creeds,  I  make  no  such  platforms  a  bond  of  union  among 
christians.  We,  like  the  Romanists,  differ  about  church  discipline 
among  ourselves  :  but  all  the  Protestant  world  believes  this  '  apostles' 
creed,'  as  it  is  called  ;  and  are  as  uniform  in  this  faith  as  the  "  mother 
church"  herself.  ^ 

I  was  sorry  to  hear  the  election  of  the  pope,  the  pretended  vicar  of 
Christ,  as  respects  riots,  and  blows,  and  carnage,  compared  to  that  of 
the  president  of  the  United  States,  and  to  have  the  excesses  com- 
plained of  in  Rome,  excused  on  the  ground,  that  sometimes  we  have 
mobs,  and  perhaps  a  fight  on  a  presidential  election.  Is  the  presiden- 
tial chair  of  such  dignity  and  sanctity  as  that  of  the  vicar  of  Christ  1  ! 
And  is  a  riot  or  murder  no  more  incongruous  in  the  one  case  than  in 
the  other]  We  opine,  that  he  who  holds  that  exalted  station  should 
come  into  it  without  blood.  And  yet  in  all  these  political  elections, 
since  the  Protestant  reformation,  there  is  nothing  to  equal  half  the  up- 
roar, and  tumult,  and  murder,  that  happened  in  filling  the  chair  of  St. 
Peter,  at  the  conflict  between  Damasus  and  Ursinus,  not  to  mention  a 
second.  Can  it  be  compared  to  the  election  of  the  president  so  as  to 
transfer  to  the  one  the  language  which  is  pertinent  to  the  other  ?  As, 
for  example,  "Take  heed  to  the  flock  over  which  the  Holy  Spirit  has 
placed  you!" 

The  gentleman  is  glad  that  his  church  is  ao  liberal  as  to  authorize 
9  2       •       -. 


78  DEBATE    ON    THE 

every  sort  of  baptism,  even  that  performed  by  heretics,  provided  only 
the  proper  name  be  pronounced  !  Tliis  is  certainly  a  modern  excess 
of  liberality.  If  I  am  rightly  informed,  his  predecessor,  in  this  very 
charge,  was  not  so  liberal  as  he — in  one  case,  at  least,  which  occurred 
at  Portsmouth  in  this  state.  There  were  two  members  of  the  Episco- 
pal church,  one  of  the  parties  the  son  of  an  Episcopalian  minister,  de- 
sirous of  entering  into  matrimony.  Bishop  Fenwick  desired  to  know 
of  what  party  they  were,  and  on  learning  that  they  were  Episcopalians, 
refused  to  marry  them,  unless  previously  baptized  by  himself.  There 
may  be  many  other  instances  of  the  same  sort,  certainly,  in  former 
limes  there  were  many,  and  so  far  as  they  prove  that  the  church  is  not 
immutable,  are  hopeful  indications  of  the  possibility  of  reform.  But 
this  is  not  the  question  before  us.  We  are  not  discussing  baptism,  or 
the  eucharist,  or  any  of  the  "  seven  sacraments,"  or  any  ordinance  of 
the  church.  Will  the  gentleman  inform  us  whether  his  church  regards 
the  administration  of  the  eucharist,  or  any  other  of  her  seven  sacra- 
ments valid,  unless  at  the  hand  of  those  whom  she  authorizes  to  min- 
nister  them.  Let  him  not  wave  the  question  by  a  reference  to  a  prac- 
tice which  he  knows  can  be  explained  on  other  principles. 

I  shall  not  now  stop  to  dispute  about  Sylvester  and  the  council  ot 
Nice:  but  shall  resume  my  general  argument  where  I  left  off. 

All  agree  that  if  primacy  or  supremacy  reside  in  the  church  at  all, 
it  must  reside  in  some  person.  If  Jesus  Christ  intended  to  make  Petei 
the  prince  of  apostles,  the  vicar  of  Christ;  the  title  will  prove  it  clear 
ly.  If  this  headship,  on  the  other  hand,  was  not  given  to  Peter;  none 
can  derive  it  from  him  by  succession.  Was  Peter  invested  with  this 
authority?  If  not,  none  can  pretend  to  it  as  his  successors.  The 
whole  question  rests  on  this.  My  learned  opponent  cannot  show  that 
Peter  ever  had  such  an  office.  He  affirms,  indeed,  that  Peter  was  su- 
perior to  the  rest  of  the  apostles:  but  does  he  show  in  what  respect  1 
How  many  kinds  of  superiority  might  there  have  been  in  his  case  1  1 
will  answer  for  him  and  say  that  there  are,  at  least, /o«r.  1st.  of  age, 
2nd.  of  talents,  3d.  of  character,  and  4th.  of  office.  These  are  clearly 
marked  in  holy  writ,  and  fixed  in  society.  Admit  then  that  Peter  is 
head  of  the  list;  can  he  decide  which  of  these  four  has  placed  him 
first.  *Phe  bishop  asserts  that  he  was  first  in  o^ce.  But  how  can  he 
lake  this  for  granted,  when  there  are  three  other  ways  in  which  Peter 
might  be  at  the  head  ?  Is  this  the  reasoning  that  logic  or  Catholicism 
sanctions  or  requires  ? 

I  would  request  the  gentleman  to  tell  us,  how  he  knows  which  of 
these  four  sorts  of  superiority  to  ascribe  to  Peter  !  He  assumes  one, 
and  is  bold  in  asserting  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  a  supreme  head  of  the 
church  on  this  assumption.  Peter  may  have  been  the  oldest,  or  the 
first  called  of  all  the  apostles  :  or  his  character  or  talents  may  have 
given  him  a  decided  superiority  ;  why  then  assume  one,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  the  others.  The  greatest  empires  have  been  built  on  the  most 
bold  assumptions.  But  never  was  there  a  more  baseless  monarchy  in 
the  annals  of  time  than  that  of  papal  Rome.  I  wish  my  opponent 
would  for  once  assume,  or  take  up  some  one  of  these  grand  points,  on 
which  his  church  rests,  and  not  waste  his  time  in  fighting  about  sha- " 
dows  or  peccadillos.  Let  him  come  at  once  to  the  great  principles  of 
the  debate.  I  challenge  him  to  show  cause,  why  he  assumes  for  Petei 
a  supremacy  of  office,  rather  than  of  age,  of  talent,  or  of  character, 


KOMA?f    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  "^ 

any  one  of  which  is  much  more  feasible  and  probable  than  that  whicb 
he  has  begged. — [Time  expired.] 

Half  pad  2  o'clock,  P.  AL 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

I  was  far  from  charging  Mr.  C.  with  a  wilful  dereliction  of  the  tmth 
when  he  stated,  w^hat  he  now  confesses  to  be  untrue,  that  Gregory 
crowned  Phocas.  The  imputed  motive  was  very  base,  but  he  now 
sees  that  it  was  not  the  pope's.  I  attribute  this  extraordinary  mis- 
take, on  the  part  of  my  friend,  to  the  fact  of  his  having  been  too  apt 
to  believe  that  every  thing  written  against  Catholics  must  be  true,  and 
to  his  memory's  not  having  been  lately  refreshed  in  his  early  readings. 
But  it  is  due  to  the  public  that  he  should  apologize  for  having, 
through  want  of  care  on  a  matter  of  so  much  importance,  fallen  into 
80  very  serious  a  mistake  in  what  was  calculated  so  deeply  to  injure 
the  truth.  He  should  first  have  inquired  whether  all  he  said  was 
true.  I  repeat,  then,  that  Gregory  did  not  crown  Phocas  at  all,  much 
less  for  the  express  purpose  of  eliciting  from  the  gratitude  of  the  sover- 
eign an  acknowledgment  of  his  "  papal  supremacy"  for  this  recognition 
was  as  old  as  Christianity.  Order  was  restored  in  Constantinople.  He 
then  sent  him  words  of  compliment  on  his  accession.  It  is  contrarj'  to 
the  rules  of  sound  argument  to  presume  that  Gregory  approved  of  the 
circumstances  which  led  to  the  change  of  dynasty.  Napoleon  grasped 
the  Iron  crown  of  Italy,  from  the  altar  and  put  it  on  his  brow,  for  he 
acknowledged  no  Donor  thereof  but  his  sword.  So  would  Phocas, 
very  probably  have  done  with  the  crown  of  C,  whatever  Gre- 
gory might  have  thought  of  the  act.  Moreover,  Phocas  did  not 
hurl  Mauritius  from  the  throne-  Mauritius  abdicated,  and  the  people, 
not  the  bishop  of  C.  P.  made  Phocas  king,  in  the  place  of  Mauritius, 
a  miser,  and  a  tyrant;  and  Gregory  rejoiced,  not  at  the  disturbances  but 
at  the  restoration  of  order.  My  friend  now  treats  these  matters  as 
light,  and  incidental.  It  was  he  himself  who  made  then  principals, 
by  the  manner  in  which  he  introduced  them.  He  was  arguing  a  knotty 
point,  the  manner  in  which  Rome  came  to  "assume"  her  high  pre- 
rogative over  the  church-  The  plain,  scriptural  truth,  that  she  came 
to  it  by  divine  appointment  was  before  his  ej'es,  but  he  would  not  see 
it.  Is  it  to  be  wondered  at  that  he  saw  in  history  what  was  not  there ! 
I  will  say  no  more  on  the  subject  of  Joshua.  Eusebius  confirms,  n.  46, 
what  I  have  said.  The  object  of  the  ministry  of  the  old  or  of  the  new 
law,  of  the  coming  of  Christ,  of  the  shedding  of  his  blood,  and  all  the  in- 
stitutions of  his  religion,  was  not  the  setting  up  of  a  tabernacle  in  the  wil- 
derness, or  the  crossing  of  the  Jordan,  or  the  surveying  of  a  piece  of 
land  and  dividing  it  among  a  few  tribes,  but  the  salvation  of  man- 
kind, without  any  exception,  or  distinction  of  age,  or  clime ;  and 
this  great  work  of  regeneration  and  redemption  is  just  as  important 
now,  and  will  continue  so  while  there  are  imjiortal  souls  to  be  en- 
lightened and  saved,  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  the  apostles.  Their 
office  must  remain,  and  their  successors  are  charged  with  it.  llie 
bishops  and  their  assistant  brethren  watch  over  the  safety  of  the  fold, 
and  the  sovereign  pontiff  sees  that  they  and  their  flocks  persevere  in 
nnity.  He  watches  over  all- 
Mr.  C.  persists  in  saying  that  the  Novatians,  Donatists.  Paultcians 
&c-  &c-  agreed  in  doctrine,  aud  may  be  considered  as  the  Catholic 


f 


80  UEBATE    Oy    THE  , 

church.  I  have  already  refuted  this  theory,  but  here  is  Protestant  tes- 
timony again  to  destroy  it,  and  I  hope  we  shall  not  waste  any  more 
time  on  it,  for  it  is  too  absurd.  "  No  heretic,"  says  VV'addington, 
p.  154,  "was  as  likely  as  the  Donatist  to  lay  claim  to  the  name  Ca- 
tholic ;  yet  even  a  Donatist,  while  he  maintained  that  the  true  spirit 
and  purity  were  alone  perpetuated  in  his  own  communion,  would  scarce- 
ly have  affirmed  that  that  was  bo7ut  fide  the  universal  church,  zvhich 
aid  not  extend  beyond  the  shores  of  Jlfrica,  and  ivhich  had  not  the  ma^ 
jority  even  there.''''  Speaking  of  the  sects  in  Dauphine  and  other  errorists 
condemned  at  Arras  in  1025,  the  same  author  says,  (p.  554)  "It  is 
proper  to  mention  what  these  opinions  really  were,  which  were  con 
'  demned  at  Arras,  lest  it  should  be  supposed  that  they  were  at  variance 
onlv  with  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  and  strictly  in  accordance  with 
apostolic  truth."  "  It  was  asserted  that  the  sacrament  of  baptism 
was  useless  and  of  no  efficacy  to  salvation,  (what  does  Mr.  C.  think 
of  this  ?)  that  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  supper  was  equally  unne- 
eessary. — It  appears  that  the  objectio-^s  of  the  heretics  on  this  point 
went  beyond  the  mere  denial  of  the  change  of  substance — that  the 
sacred  orders  of  the  ministry  were  not  of  divine  institution — that 
penance  was  altogether  inefficacious — that  marriage  in  general  was 
contrary  to  the  evangelical  and  apostolical  laws — that  saint-worship  is 
to  be  confined  to  the  apostles  and  martyrs,  &c.  &c.  so  mixed  and  various 
is  the  substance  of  those  opinions  to  which  learned  writers  on  this 
subject  appeal  with  so  much  satisfaction."  Again,  "  they  were  all  taint- 
ed more  or  less  deeply  by  the  poison  of  Manichaesism  :  and  since  it  is 
Dur  object  to  establish  a  connexion,  with  the  primitive  church,  we  shall 
scarcely  attain  it  through  those  whose  fundamental  principle  was  un 
equivocally  rejected  by  that  church,  as  irrational  and  impious."  555. 
Mosheim  says,  1st  vol.  p.  328,  "  Among  the  sects  that  troubled 
the  Latin  church,  this  century,  (the  12th)  the  principal  place  is  due  to 
the  Cathari,  or  Catharists,  whom  we  have  had  already  occasion  to 
mention.  This  numerous  faction,  leaving  their  first  residence,  which 
was  in  Bulgaria,  spread  themselves  throughout  almost  all  the  European 
provinces,  where  they  occasioned  much  tumult  and  disorder.  Their 
religion  resembled  the  doctrine  of  the  Manicheans  and  Gnostics,  on 
which  account  they  commonly  received  the  denomination  of  the  former, 
though  they  differed  in  many  respects  from  the  genuine  primitive 
Manicheans.  They  all  indeed,  agreed  in  the  following  points  of  doc- 
trine, viz.  that  matter  was  the  source  of  all  evil ;  that  the  creator  of 
this  world  was  a  being  distinct  from  the  supreme  deity  ;  that  Christ 
was  neither  clothed  with  a  real  body,  nor  could  be  properly  said  to 
have  been  born,  or  to  have  seen  death ;  that  human  bodies  were  the 
iDroduction  of  the  evil  principle,  and  were  extinguished  without  the 
rospect  of  a  new  life.  They  treated  with  the  utmost  contempt  all 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  expressed  a  high  degree  of  ven- 
eration for  the  New."  Speaking  of  the  Waldenses,  p.  332,  Mosheim 
says,  "  They  committed  the  government  of  the  church  to  bishops, 
presbyters  and  deacons,  but  they  deemed  it  absolutely  necessary  that 
all  these  orders  should  resemble  exactly  the  apostles  of  the  divine 
Savior,  and  be  like  them  illiterate,  &c.  &c.  The  laity  were  divided 
into  two  classes,  one  of  which  contained  the  perfect  and  the  other  the 
imperfect  christians."  Of  another  sect,  the  Pasaginians,  MosheiiP 
says,  p.  333,  "  They  circumcised  their  followers,  and  held  that  the  law 
of  Moses,  in  every  thing  but  sacrifice,  was  obligatory  upon  Chjis- 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  81 

^ians."  "What  the  same  Protestant  historian  says  of  the  brethren  of 
the  free  spirit  is  too  horrid.  It  is  the  foulest  of  the  many  foul  pacjes 
he  has  stained  with  the  history  of  sects.  "They  maintained  that  the 
believer  could  not  sin,  let  his  conduct  be  ever  so  horrible  and  atro- 
cious." The  celebrated  Ziska,  not  a  Roman  Catholic  inquisitor,  but 
the  austere  general  of  the  Hussites,  another  sect  of  Protestants,  fall- 
ing upon  this  miserible  sect  in  1421,  "put  some  to  the  sword  and 
condemned  the  rest  to  the  flames."  Mosheim,  428.  "  A  sect  of  fana- 
tics called  Caputiati,  infested  Moravia  and  Burgundy,  the  diocese  of 
A'jxerre,  and  several  other  parts  of  France,  in  all  which  places  they 
excited  much  disturbance  among  the  people.  They  declared  publicly 
that  their  purpose  was,  to  level  all  distinctions,  to  abrogate  magistra- 
cy, to  remove  all  subordination  among  mankind,  and  to  restore  that 
primitive  liberty,  that  natural  equality,  which  were  the  inestimable 
privileges  of  the  first  mortals."  Mosheim,  p.  333.  Luther  repeatedly 
declared  that  he  stood  alone,  that  all  antiquity  was  against  him.  Here 
are  startling  facts  and  no  less  startling  admissions  by  sound  Protes- 
tants. Will  my  friend  insult  this  enlightened  assembly  by  making  up  a 
monster-church,  a  very  chimera,  of  all  these  sects,  and  give  modern 
Protestants  all  the  honors  present  and  prospective  of  being  the  tail  of 
the  beast  ?  I  would  counsel  him  not  to  dream  of  doing  so,  and  tAern 
to  look  out  for  more  reputable  religious  ancestors. 

But  the  Roman  Catholic  church  has  changed  at  least  in  discipline. 
Grantit.  And  what  of  that  ?  Is  it  not  the  very  nature  of  discipline  that 
it  must  be  modified  by  times,  places,  peculiarities  of  nations  and  other 
circumstances,  in  order  to  be  adapted  to  the  wants  of  man  in  all  the 
varieties  of  his  being  ?  Truth  is  unsusceptible  of  change.  Like  God 
it  is  always  the  same.  But  the  form  of  the  dress  of  the  clergy,  the  color 
of  the  wine  to  be  used  at  mass,  day's  of  fasting  and  abstinence,  and 
of  public  meetings  for  prayer  and  certain  unessential  rites  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  sacraments,  maybe  changed.  The  constitution  of 
the  church  should  possess  this  element  of  good  government.  She  has 
the  power  to  make  these  changes,  and  she  has  made  them  as  the  wants 
of  her  children  seemed  to  require.  But  the  doctrine  is  invariable. 
Heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away,  but,  of  it,  not  an  iota  shall  change. 

As  to  the  deaths  occasioned  in  the  election  of  a  pope,  I  ask  again, 
what  has  that  to  do  with  the  constitutionality  of  the  oifice  ?  The  pope 
did  not  slay  those  people.  According  to  the  gentleman's  theory,  the 
president  of  this  union  would  have  to  answer  for  the  blood,  if  any, 
spilled  at  his  ejection.  I  am  astonished  that  such  arguments  should 
be  repeated.  I  can  say  with  certainty  of  my  venerable  predecessor 
that  he  would  not  have  pursued  the  course,  he  did,  if  the  story  be 
true,  if  he  had  had  reason  to  believe  the  individuals  had  never  been 
baptized — and  if  any  two  or  more  young  people  will  come  to  me,  who 
have  been  rightly  baptized  in  Protestant  communions,  I  warrant  them. 
If  there  be  no  other  obstacles,  they  shall  be  quickly  bound  together  in 
the  indissoluble  bonds  of  matrimony. 

I  am  perfectly  willing  to  revert  to  the  point  of  the  supremacy  of  St 
Peter  and  the  continuance  of  his  high  authority  in  his  successors,  for  it 
is  a  cardinal  doctrine.  It  solves  a  thousand  lesser  points  of  difficulty 
and  I  am  happy  to  argue  it  again  from  the  New  Testament,  from 
church  history,  from  reason.  I  have  already  quoted  scripture  for  th.» 
dogma  of  the  supremacy  of  Peter — "upon  this  rock  will  I  bviiio  my 
church."     My  friend  does  not  like  to  approach  that  rock, — He  take* 

6 


/^ 


82  ^  DEBATE    ON    THE 

care  to  keep  shy  of  it.  I  also  quoted  "feed  my  lambs, — feed  tny 
sheep" — "  To  thee  I  will  give  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"— 
"  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon," — and  "  when  thou  art  anointed  confirm  thy 
brethren,"  &c.  All  these  texts,  and  more,  did  I  quote,  and  the  gentle- 
man has  had  my  authority  before  him.  I  shall  now  strengthen  my 
quotation  from  the  fathers,  adducing  overwhelming  facts  to  prove  that 
Peter  weis  bishop  of  Rome  and  that  the  bishops  of  that  see  have  ever 
been  regarded  in  the  Catholic  church  as  his  successors.  Many  of  my 
hearers  may  suppose  that  this  matter  is  buried  in  the  night  of  time- 
that  history  is  either  silent,  or  not  sufficiently  cleair  upon  it.  But 
when  they  hear  the  splendid  testimonies  I  am  going  to  adduce,  they 
will  change  their  minds  on  this  subject,  and  confess  that,  from  time 
immemorial,  in  the  very  earliest  ages,  the  church  was  precisely  the 
same,  in  its  faith,  its  sacraments,  its  hierarchy,  its  clergy,  &c.  &c. 
that  the  Catholic  church  is  at  the  present  day.  (Here  bishop  Purcell 
held  up  the  map  of  the  succession  of  popes  from  the  first,  Peter  him- 
self, down  to  the  present  pontiflf,  Gregory  XVI. ;  the  names  of  all  the 
most  eminent  men  in  the  church;  the  date  of  the  establishment  of  the 
gospel  in  the  various  countries  of  the  world,  the  origin  and  authors  of 
the  various  heresies  and  schisms,  their  condemnation  by  general  coun- 
cils, or  synods,  &c.  &c.)  let  any  other  exhibit  such  an  array ! 

Christ  Jesus  said  to  his  disciples  "  go,  teach  all  nations."  They 
went !  they  preached  every  where,  and  the  world  believed  !  before 
their  death  they  ordained  others  whose  names  are  here  faithfully  re- 
corded. Here  is  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  Eusebius,  and  according 
to  the  pun  upon  his  name  (you  see  by  us)  you  will  see  by  him  whai 
a  flood  of  light  irradiates  this  subject.  Eusebius  wrote  in  the  4tL 
century,  and  to  remove  all  suspicion  I  bring  before  you  the  translation 
of  his  history  by  a  Protestant  minister.  C.  F.  Cruse,  A.  M.  Assistant 
Professor  of  the  university  of  Pennsylvania,  2d.  edition,  revised  and 
corrected  by  the  author.  [The  reading  was  interrupted  by  the  half 
hour's  expiring.*] 

Four  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

Is  the  original  Greek  of  Irenieus  extant  1  [The  bishop  intimates, 
♦  A'b.']  Of  what  authority,  then,  is  the  version  from  which  he  reads? 
I  have  never  read  in  Irenaeus  nor  seen  quoted  from  him  a  warrant  for 
the  assumption  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  of  Rome  1  But  of  this 
again- 
After  raising  such  a  dust  as  the  gentleman  has  about  Phocas  and 
Gregory,  it  has  become  necessary  for  me  to  re-state  my  argument. 

Gregory  the  great  wrote  to  Mauritius,  requesting  him  to  induce 
John,  bishop  of  Constantinople,  to  give  up  his  claim  to  the  title  of 
universal  father.  Mauritius  would  not  do  it.  Gregory  the  great,  is 
supposed  by  all  antiquity  to  have  harbored  a  grudge,  or  bad  feeling 
towards  Mauritius,  because  of  this ;  and  therefore  his  exultation  at 
his  death,  and  his  easy  recognition  of  the  pretensions  of  his  murderer, 
which  acquiescence,  on  his  part,  secured  the  compliance  of  Phocas 
niih  the  wishes  of  Gregorj-,  and  secured  to  his  successors  the  title  of 
m  versal  patriarch,  or  pope — 

■Bishop  Purcell  here  observed,  that  Phocas  was  not  the  murderer 
Oi  Mauritius.] 

*  The  extract  relerred  to  will  be  found  in  a  subsequent  speech. 


HOMAN    CAIMOLIC    RELIGION.  83 

Very  well,  I  have  the  authority  of  Gibl)on  for  my  assertion — not 
for  saying  that  he  icilled  him  by  his  own  hands  :  but  by  his  authority, 
as  he  lays  to  Phocas  the  blood  of  Mauritius  and  his  seven  children, 
on  the  principle,  luifant  per  atterum,  facii  per  se.  He  does  himself 
what  he  does  by  an  other.  The  said  Phocas  did  afterwards,  Barronius 
being  a  faithful  witness,  give  the  title  of  universal  bishop  to  Boniface, 
Gregory's  successor,  and  who  can  infer  any  thing  else  from  all  the 
circumstances,  than  I  have  done  1  ! 

I  thought  the  gentl^eman  was  about  to  produce  authority  to  prove 
that  Sylvester  did  call  the  council  of  Nice.  This,  I  again  assert  he 
cannot  do-  If  he  think  he  can,  let  him  attempt  it,  and  we  will  show 
he  cannot.  We,  however,  do  assert  on  the  authority  of  Eusebius,  and 
all  ancient  history,  that  Constantine  the  great  did  call  the  council  of 
Nice  ;  and  we  affirm  on  equal  authority,  that  the  pope's  legate  did  7iot 
preside  in  that  council.  Whether  Hos*os  did  is  problematical.  It  is 
inferred  from  the  fact  of  his  being  present :  but  there  is  no  historic 
■authority  for  it.  But  all  this  is  very  subordinate  and  of  little  value. 
The  whole  question  rests  upon  the  inquiry,  What  office  had  Peter  ? 
What  was  his  ecclesiastical  power  and  patronage  1  Was  Peter  the 
prince  of  the  apostles?  Was  he  made  the  vicar  of  Christ!  Ay,  this 
IS  the  question  !  It  requires  explicit — nay,  positive  scripture  authori- 
ty— where  is  it  I 

The  gentleman  offers  several  passages  to  this  point.  I  shall  exa-t 
mine  the  prominent  texts,  and  begin  with  the  16th  chapter  of  Mat- 
thew.— I  read  from  Griesbach's  Greek  Testament.  In  this  chapter, 
Christ  asks  his  disciples  the  question,  "  Who  do  men  say  that  I  am  V 
and  afterwards  asks  them,  "  But  who  say  ye  that  I  am  V  and  PeLer 
answered  :  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God  ;"  "  and 
Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  him,  blessed  are  you,  Simon  Barjona, 
for  flesh  and  blood  has  not  revealed  it  to  you,  but  ray  Father,  who 
is  in  hevwen :  and  I  say  also  to  you,  that  you  are  Peter,  and  upon  this 
rock  I  will  build  my  congregation  and  the  gates  of  hades  shall  not 
prevail  against  it."     Matth.  xvi.  13 — 18. 

"  Upon  this  rock  :"  was  Peter  this  rock  ?  The  words  sound  much 
alike,  {Petros  and  Petra).  Let  us  examine  the  passage.  One  of  tbe 
internal  evidences  of  the  truth  of  the  apostolic  writings  fs,  that  each 
writer  has  something  peculiar  to  himself.  So  has  every  speaker  and 
teacher,  that  has  appeared  amongst  men.  Jesus  Christ  himself  had 
his  peculiar  characteristics.  One  of  his  peculiarities  most  clearly 
marked  by  the  four  evangelists  is,  that  he  consecrated  every  scene 
and  circumstance  and  topic  of  conversation  to  religion  or  morality.  A 
few  examples,  out  of  many  that  might  be  given,  must  suffice.  When 
standing  by  the  sea  of  Galilee,  he  says  to  the  fishermen,  who  Were 
easting  their  nets  into  the  sea:  "follow  me,  and  I  will  make  you 
Jishers  nf  men."  At  the  well  of  Samaria,  ho  says  to  a  Samaritan  wjm- 
an,  from  whom  he  asked  a  drink — ^"  Whoever  shall  drink  of  this  wa- 
ter shall  thirst  again  ;  but  whoever  drinks  of  the  watei  that  I  sliall 
give  him,  shall  never  thirst:  but  it  shall  be  in  him  a  well  of  w;  ter 
springing  up  to  eternal  life."  While  with  his  disciples  in  the 
temple,  and  seeing  the  sheep  going  up  to  be  sacrificed,  he  says  :  "  ^ly 
sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  they  follow  me;"  and  he  speaks  of  himsoll 
as  the  true  shepherd,  who  lays  down  his  life  for  his  sheep.  His  dis 
ciples  havinii;  forgotten  to  take  bread,  when  embarking  on  the  !-v.:h 
and   when  talking  about  it,  he  took  occasion  to  say  :  "  Beware  ot  xhf 


8-1  DEBATE    ON    THE 

leaven  of  the  Pharisees."  When  on  Mount  Olivet,  amonfr  the  vires 
and  olives,  he  says,  "  I  am  the  true  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  vine, 
dresser."  And  when  .looking  at  the  temple,  he  says  :  "  Destroy  iliis 
temple,  and  I  will  build  it  in  three  days." — So  in  the  passage  before 
us.  He  asks  his  disciples  an  all  important  question,  in  rej''y  to  which, 
one  of  them  who  happens  to  be  named  Peter,  utters  the  ;;real  truth, 
upon  which  he  is  to  found  his  church  forever  :  "  Thou  art  the  Chrlst, 
(the  Messiah),  the  Son  of  the  living  God."  Jesus  turns  to  him 
and  says :  "  Thou  art  stone,  and  upon  ikis  rock  (on  this  great  truth 
vhich  flesh  and  blood  has  not  revealed  to  thee),  I  will  build  my 
church." 

El  <rj  rifTgic,  *</  vri  t«ut«  tn  Tnrtt^t — "  ei  SO  Petros,  kai  ep{  tauie  te  petra'^ 
—'You  are  Peter  and  upon  this  pefra,^  strikes  the  ear  of  a  Grecian  as 
'  thou  art  stone  and  upon  this  rock,*  strikes  the  ear  of  an  English  man  ; 
and  as  we  have  seen  is  a  part  of  the  Savior's  peculiarity. 

The  construction  of  language  requires  that  the  word  '*  fhiis"  should 
refer  to  something  antecedent  different  from  Ihmt,  or  you.  Tliey  are 
different  in  person  and  in  ca^e.  But  not  only  does  the  Savior's  peculiar 
characteristics,  and  the  change  of  person  from  "  fkou"  the  personal, 
to  this  the  demonstrative,  fix  the  sense :  but  other  considerations  of 
great  moment,  forbid  any  other  interpretation.  For  let  me  ask,  why 
did  J{V'  "%  propound  the  question  to  his  apostles — why  did  he  elici* 
from  them  so  great  a  truth,  if  in  the  solemn  declaration  which  imme 
diately  follo-vs,  he  meant  to  pass  by  that  truth  and  allide  to  Petei 
alone.  This  would  be  a  sole-nsm  unprecedented — acas«»  unparalleled 
The  whole  authority  of  the  christian  religion  and  all  its  excellency  is 
embraced  in  the  radical  ideas  which  had  been  for  the  first  time  pro- 
nounced by  the  lips  of  man.  There  are,  indeed,  but  three  cardinal 
ideas  in  all  christian  doctrine :  for  there  can  be  but  three  cardinal 
ideas  about  any  being.  Two  of  these  are  distinctly  embodied  in  Pe- 
ter's confession  of  faith.  The  whole  three  are,  1st  the  person,  2nd 
the  othce,  and  3rd  the  character  of  Christ.  Beyond  these — person 
office  and  character,  what  conception  can  mortals  have  of  our  Redeemer  1 
Peter  mouthed  of  these,  the  two  which  gave  value  to  the  third — The 
person  and  the  mission  of  .fesus.  He  was  the  first  mortal  who,  dis- 
tinctly and  intelligibly  avowed  the  faith,  in  the  person  and  mission  ol 
Jesus  the  Nazarene,  upon  which  the  empire  of  the  ransomed  race 
shall  stand  forever.  This  is  the  good  confession  spoken  by  Jesus 
himself  at  the  hazard  of  his  life,  before  Pontius  Pilate,  of  which 
Patfl  speaks  in  tr^ms  of  the  highest  admiration. 

This  great  truth  deservedly  stands  forward  under  the  bold  meta- 
phor of  the  Rock.  But  still  more  creditable  to  this  truth, — not "  flesh 
rtud  blood,"  but  the  Heavenly  Father  first  uttered  it  from  Heaven.  On 
the  banks  of  the  Jordan,  when  Jesus  had  honored  his  Father  in  his 
baptism,  his  Father  honored  him  ;  and  was  it  not  worthy  to  be  honor- 
ed by  proclaiming  it  from  the  opening  sky,  "  This  is  my  Son,  the  be- 
loved in  whom  I  delight,''''  while  the  descending  Dove  marked  him 
out  ]     A  Pagan  poet  said, 

"  Ncvi  r  I'ltroiiuce  a  (iod  unless  upon  an  ocrasion  wort'iv  of  him:"* 

And  who  feels  not  the  propriety  of  such  an  introduction  here ;  for 
when  first  spoken,  no  angel  in  heaven,  nor  man  on  earth,  could  intro- 
duce the  Messiah,  in  his  proper  person,  but  his  own  Father.     No\», 

*  Nee  Deus  lutersit  aisi  dignus  riadice  iiodus-  -Inciderit. — Hor. 


HOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  85 

because  Peter  was  the  first  to  utter  it,  Jesus  says  to  him :  "  I  will  glvfl 
to  y')u  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  whatever  you  shall 
bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  and  whatever  you  shall  loose 
on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven." 

What  a  controversy  there  has  been  about  these  keys.  Jesus  gave 
tliem  to  Peter  cilo/ne — not  to  him,  his  heirs,  and  successors  forever !  I 
was  denoted  as  heterodox  a  few  years  since,  because  I  alleged  that 
the  opening  of  the  reign  or  kingdom  of  heaven,  by  Peter  to  Jews  and 
Gentiles,  was  the  true  exposition  of  the  keys.  But  I  am  glad  to  see 
this  view  promulged  now  from  various  reputable  sources,  even  from 
Trinity  College,  Dublin.  Peter  opened  the  kingdom  of  heaven  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  by  divulging  a  secret  never  told  to  that  day, 
viz.  "  Let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know  assuredly  that  God  has 
made  that  Jesus,  whom  you  crucified,  both  Lord  and  Christ."  This 
annunciation  of  the  coronation,  or  Christing,  that  is  anointing  of  Je- 
sus king  and  governor  of  the  universe,  was  a  new  revelation  made  on 
the  Pentecostian  morn  by  Peter.  He  declared  remission  on  that  day 
to  3000  souls,  and  introduced  them  into  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah 
Again,  when  ii  pleased  God  to  visit  the  Gentiles  in  the  family  of 
Cornelius,  a  Roman  centurion;  an  angel  sent  from  heaven,  command- 
ed him  to  send  for  Peter  to  Joppa  to  come  and  tell  him  and  his  rela- 
tions '■'■words  by  which  himself  and  his  friends  might  be  saved."  He 
did  so.  He  sent,  and  Peter  came.  Why  thus  call  upon  Peter*?  Be- 
cause Christ's  gifts  are  without  repentance.  He  had  given  him  the 
keys.  He  therefore  must  open  the  two-leaved  gate,  and  introduce 
both  Jews  and  Gentiles  into  the  kingdom.  This  being  once  done, 
needs  not  to  be  repeated.  The  gates  of  heaven  have  not  since  been 
locked.  There  is  no  more  use  for  the  keys.  Peter  has.  them  yeU 
He  took  them  to  heaven  with  him.  He  did  not  will  them  to  any  heir 
or  successor.  The  popes  are  fighting  for  shadows.  Heaven  never 
trusted  such  gentry  with  the  keys.  They  might  take  into  their  heads 
to  lock  the  heretics  out.  I  thank  God  that  he  gave  them  to  Peter, 
that  Peter  opened  the  gates  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  us  all,  and 
that  as  the  popes  cannot  shut  them,  we  do  not  need  them  a  second 
time.  Peter  will  guard  them,  till  he  who  has  the  key  of  David,  who 
opens  and  none  can  shut,  will  appear  a  second  time.  Thus  we  dis- 
pose rationally,  and  I  think  scripturally,  of  this  grand  text. 

The  next  text  upon  which  confidence  is  placed  by  my  opponent,  is 
where  Christ  says  to  Peter,  "  Feed  my  sheep,  feed  my  lambs." 
Language  has  no  meaning  but  from  the  context.  Every  word  serves 
to  fix  the  meaning  of  its  contextural  associates.  We  must  read  the 
21st  chapter  of  John's  Testimony,  from  the  beginning,  if  we  would 
correctly  understand  this  passage.  The  facts  are :  Peter  and  some 
of  his  brethren  had  returned  to  Galilee,  disconcerted  and  overwhelm- 
ed with  the  events  of  the  day.  They  felt  themselves  destitute,  forsa 
ken,  and  in  need.  While  their  master  was  with  them  he  provided 
for  them  in  some  way.  He  could  say,  when  I  sent  you  without  scrip 
or  staff  or  money,  did  you  lack  any  thing  ?  They  answered,  no.  But 
he  was  gone,  and  they  knew  not  what  to  do.  In  this  distress,  Peter 
says  "  I  am  going  a  fishing,"  and  the  rest  accompany  him  :  but  they 
toiled  all  night  and  caught  nothing.  In  the  morning  they  see  the  Sa- 
vior walking  on  the  shore ;  they  know  him  not.  He  says  to  thoiu, 
"  Children,  have  you  any  meat?"  Tliey  answer, "no."  He  tells  tliern 
to  cast  on  the  other  side  of  the  bark.  They  do  so  and  take  a  larg* 
H 


86  DEBATE    OTJ    THE 

nHmber  of  fish.  Peter,  when  he  knew  it  wds  the  Lord,  girt  his  ftsh* 
erman's  orarment  around  him,  leaped  into  the  lake,  and  swam  ashore. 
They  dine  together,  and  after  they  had  eaten  to  satiety,  Jesus  says  to 
Peter,  ^'■Do  you  love  me  more  than  these  ?" 

My  construction  of  these  words  is,  "Do  you  love  me  more  than 
these  fisli,  or  these  victuals."  He  then  says  to  Peter,  "  Feed  my 
lambs  :"  and  the  fact  before  him  and  all  the  circumstannes  say,  I  ivill 
f(ed  you. 

The  bishoj»'s  construction  is,  "Do  you  love  me  more  than  these  dis- 
ciples love  mel"  But  how  could  Peter  answer  such  a  question! 
Was  he  omniscient  to  know  how  much  his  companions  loved  his  mas- 
ter. In  that  case  he  would  hive  said,  "Lord  I  love  thee,  but  I  do  not 
know  how  much  my  brethren  love  thee ;  they  also  love  thee,  but  I 
know  not  whether  I  love  thee  more  than  they  do."  But  suppose  ha 
could  have  known,  then  I  ask,  v/as  it  comely  to  ask  so  invidious  a 
question  ?  Would  not  they  have  felt  themselves  disparaged,  if  Peter 
had  said,  "Yes  Lord,  I  love  thee  more  than  all  my  fellow  apostles  love 
thee !!!"  •' 

Peter  had  erred.  He  had  become  discontented — had  forgotten  his 
duty  to  his  master,  and  had  betaken  himself  to  his  former  occupation 
of  fishing,  and  induced  the  rest  to  join  him.  Christ  asks  him  sol- 
emnljj,  "  Do  you  love  me  more  than  these  fish,  these  boats,  nets,  ap- 
paratus, or  these  victuals,  this  worldly  employment  1  if  so,  cease  to 
spend  your  time  in  providing  food  for  yourself;  but  feed  my  sheep 
and  lambs,  and  I  will  provide  for  you."  Besides,  he  having  caught 
nothing  till  the  Master  appeared,  was  a  very  striking  lesson,  which  I 
presume  Peter  never  forgot.  I  confess,  I  think  the  gentleman's  inter- 
pretation of  sheep  as  bishops,  and  lambs  as  laity,  most  singularly  ar- 
bitrary and  fantastic,  and  needs  not  a  grave  reply.  So  we  dispose  of 
•he  second  grand  t»jxt  on  which  the  church  of  Rome  has  leaned  with 
so  much  confidence  for  so  many  ages. 

My  learned  opponent  has  not  yet  afforded  us  evidence  for  his  as- 
sumption of  official  supremacy  for  Peter.  These  texts  reach  not  the 
case.  They  do  not  institute  a  new  office  bestowed  on  Peter  but  are 
tokens  of  esteem,  for  reasons  personal.  Every  privilege  he  received 
was  on  account  of  some  personal  pre-eminence,  not  because  of  an  of- 
fice which  he  held.  The  canon  law  has  decreed  that  a  personal  priv- 
ilege doth  follow  the  person  and  is  extinguished  with  the  person. 
No^  as  all  the  honors  vouchsafed  Peter  were  in  consequence  of  his 
promptness,  courage,  penitence,  zeal,  &c.  they  never  can  become  the 
reasons  of  an  hereditary  office.  His  supremacy,  or  rather  superior! 
ty,  or  primacy,  most  naturally  arose  from  his  being  one  of  the  first,  if 
not  ihejirst  convert — the  oldest  of  Christ's  disciples  ;  because  he  was 
prompt,  decided,  courageous,  zealous,  ardent,  and  above  all,  he  was 
a  married  man,  had  a  wife  and  family.  And  although  this  fact  might 
not  comport  with  his  being  the  fountain  of  papal  authority,  it  obtain- 
ed him  an  honor  above  John  the  bachelor,  and  all  the  bachelor?  of 
that  age !! 

Once  more  on  this  subject — let  me  ask,  who  made  a  more  volunta- 
ry surrender  of  himself  to  his  master — who  more  promptly  foxsook 
all  that  he  had,  than  he — who,  when  his  Lord  asked,  will  ye  also  leave 
me,  with  more  ardor  said  ;  "  Lord,  to  wiiom  shall  we  go  but  to  thee  • 
for  thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life  V  Who  more  courageously 
in  the  time  of  peril,  drew  his  sword  to  defend  his  Master?  who,  when 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  87 

the  Savior  foretold  his  own  sufferings  and  indignities,  more  affection- 
ately and  devotedly  exclaimed,  in  the  warmth  of  his  heart,  "  Lord,  it 
shall  not  be  so  done  unto  thee  !" 

It  is  true  that  this  ardor  of  disposition,  this  promptness,  this  deci- 
sion of  character,  sometimes  betray  their  possessor  into  errors ;  yet 
who  will  not  say,  give  me  the  man  of  energy  and  decision,  and  ardor 
of  character  1  John  was  meek  as  a  dove ;  he  was  innocent  and  amia- 
ble as  a  lamb,  and  the  Lord  loved  him ;  but  those  bold  and  stern,  and 
manly  virtues  he  wanted,  which  gave  so  much  interest  to  the  charac« 
ter  of  Peter ;  and  so  admirably  fitted  him  to  stand  forward  and  fore- 
most, amongst  his  colleagues  and  fellow  apostles. — [Time  expired.] 

Half-past  4  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Purcf.ll  rises — 

Do  you  love  me  inore  than  these  fish .'.'  My  brethren,  if  the  subject 
were  not  too  serious,  I  should  call  my  friend's  construction  a  fish  story  ! 

Jesus  Christ  said  to  Peter, "  lovest  thou  me  more  than  these  ?"  plus 
his — what,  if  fish  ?  (Jx""'-')  pl^^  quam  hos.  There  is  an  end  to  all 
that  argument. 

Mr.  Campbell.     That  is  the  Latin  version.     Let  us  have  the  Greek. 

Bishop  Purcell.  The  Greek  is  not  more  plain,  nor  will  it  prove 
your  interpretation  less  revolting,  less  contrary  to  the  obvious  and 
more  common  interpretation  of  the  text.  Sad  conclusion  this,  which 
my  learned  opponent  reserved  as  his  main  reliance,  for  the  last  hour 
of  the  day  !  And  is  it  thus  that  he  proves  the  church  of  Rome  to  be 
neither  catholic,  apostolic,  nor  holy,  but  an  apostacy  from  the  only 
true,  holy  and  apostolic  church  of  Christ?  He  is  heartily  welcome 
to  the  proselytes  this  argument  may  gain  to  his  tottering  cause. 
Let  learned  Protestants  now  claim  their  champion's  services  in  the 
diflficult  task  of  interpreting  the  scripture — or  let  them,  as  I  have  pro- 
phesied they  would  do,  repudiate  his  advocacy. 

The  change  of  name  from  Simon  to  Peter,  shows  that  Christ  chose 
him  to  be,  beyond  the  other  apostles,  a  rock,  or  more  firm,  more  con- 
stant, more  immoveable  than  they — and  that  forever — in  the  confession 
of  his  divinity,  his  real  presence  with  his  church  and  all  the  other 
truths  he  had  vouchsafed  to  reveal  to  the  w'orld.  A  rock  does  not 
melt. — The  winds  may  beat  and  the  rains  may  fall,  but  the  house 
built  upon  a  rock  will  stand,  not  for  a  few  years,  but  forever.  And 
as  the  rock,  in  the  physical  order  loses  not  its  nature,  so  neither  do  tlie 
promises  of  Christ  lose  their  efficacy.  "  Thou  art  Peter,  (or  a  rock) 
and  on  this  rock,  I  will  build  my  church,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall 
not  prevail  against  it."  Matthew  xvi.  18. 

A  professor  of  Andover  College  has  published  a  volume,  I  think  it 
is  entitled  "  Elements  of  Sacred  Criticism."  I  have  examined  this 
work,  but  my  memory  retains  not  the  author's  name, — perhaps  some 
of  the  learned  gentlemen  present  may  aid  it  by  the  suggestion — how- 
ever, he  substantiates  my  interpretation,  or  rather  that  of  all  ages,  by 
incontrovertible  argument.  And  I  confess  the  American  College  has, 
in  this  instance,  a  decided  superiority,  both  in  sound  criticism  and  or 
thodoxy,  over  the  "  dumb  sister,"  as  the  English  and  Scotch  universi- 
ties have  invidiously,  or  facetiously,  named  Trinity  College,  Dublin 

There  is  one  plausible  ditficulty,  against  the  testimony  of  Peter's 
having  fixed  his  residence  at  Rome,  which  the  gentleman  has  overlook- 

■J,  viz.  that  Paul  does  not  mention  Peter  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans. 


B8  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Td  explain  this,  it  is  only  necessary  to  observe,  Paul  wrote  A.  D.  57. 
in  the  reiorn  of  Claudius,  when  Peter  was  absent  from  Rome ;  and 
this  the  illustrious  convert  of  Damascus  knew.  But  why  waste  time 
on  a  subject  undisputed  for  fifteen  hundred  years.  Pearson,  Grolius, 
Usher,  Hammond,  Blondel,  Scaliger,  Casaubon,  Dumoulin,  Petit, 
Basnage,  all  agree  that  Peter  transferred  his  see  to  Rome  and  there 
sulFered  martj^rdom. 

And  here  another  objection  is  overruled  ;  he  said  there  had  been 
contests  among  the  apostles,  who  should  be  greatest.  He  said  that 
if  Peter  had  confessed  that  he  loved  him  most,  a  greater  controversy 
would  have  arisen.  But  there  was  good  cause  to  the  contrary.  An- 
drew saw  him  first — .Tohn  reposed  on  his  bosom,  &c. — for  many  rea 
sons,  these  disputes  may  have  arisen — surely  such  objections  after  so 
great  a  mass  of  testimony  deserved  not  serious  attention, 

I  have  long  ago  seen,  in  a  little  work  written  in  Philadelphia,  the 
remarks  of  my  friend  about  the  Savior's  saying  he  was  the  vine,  when 
among  the  vines,  on  mount  Olivet,  &c.  &c.  This  is  not  therefore  orig- 
inal or  new. 

I  now  take  up  a  connected  argument  on  the  apostolicity  of  the  church, 
for  I  wish  this  matter  to  go  before  the  public  in  its  peculiar  strength. 
I  look  upon  it  as  the  most  powerful  argument  that  can  be  advanced  in 
favor  of  the  Catholic  church.    I  read  from  Fletcher.    His  style  is  good. 

"Christ  Jesus  liacl'called  the  apostles  '■Jishers  of  men,'  be  had  told  them  to 
*go  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature,'  assuring  them,  at  the  same  time, 
that  'all  power  was  given  to  him  in  heaven,  and  on  earth,'  and  that  *  himself 
would  be  always  with  them.'  Animated  by  this  commission,  and  the.ie  assurancet, 
and  fired  too  with  the  love  of  God,  and  an  ardent  charity-  for  men,  these  heroic 
victims  of  benevolence,  did  '  go/brth  and  preach.'  They  preached ;  and  aithoug-h 
the  world  with  all  its  passions,  prejudices  and  superstitions  was  leagued  against 
Iheni; — although  its  doctrines,  which  they  preached,  were  repugnant  to  ali  the 
bad  propensities  of  the  heart,  and  exceeded  far  the  measure  of  the  human  under- 
stanaing;  yet  did  an  immense  portion  of  the  public,  of  the  corrupted  and 
the  vicious,  of  the  learned  and  the  enlightened,  hear  them,  and  believe.  •  Thty 
preached;  and  the  love  of  vice  was  converted  into  leal  for  innocence;  prejudice, 
into  the  desire  of  truth:  superstition,  into  the  warmth  of  piety.  Vice  itself  was 
exalted  into  the  heroism  ot  sanctity;  and  every  defilement  done  away,  which  cor- 
ruption had  introduced  into  the  sanctuary  of  the  heart,  l^hey  prtached;  and 
Satan,  like  a  thundet holt,  was  hurled  from  his  throne;  his  temples  razed;  his 
altars  overturned;  and  idolatry,  abashed  and  trembling,  fled  from  those  scenes, 
which  it  had  so  long  disgraced  by  its  follies,  and  infected  bv  its  abominations. 
They  preached;  and  the  Universe  was  changed!  The  spectacle  which  they  exhi- 
bited was  new;  the  spectacle  of  exalted  virtue  and  consummate  wisdom.  Mtn 
beheld  the  virtue  and  it  edified  them;  they  listened  to  the  wistloni.  and  it  con 
vinced  them.  In  this  manner  did  the  first  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ  completely 
realize  the  figure  of  the  'Jishers  of  men,'  completely  verify  the  assurance  whicn 
their  divine  Master  had  given  them,  that  '  himself  lootdd  be  always  with  them, 
completely  illustrate  that  passage  of  St.  Paul,  in  which  he  says,  '  God  employ 
the  weak  to  confound  the  strong,  and  the  foolish  to  coitfute  the  icise.'  It  is  th 
call  and  mission  of  the  apostles,  which  are  the  sources  of  the  call  and  mission 
of  their  successors,  and  it  is  the  successes  that  attended  the  preaching  of  the 
apostles,  that  are  the  proof,  not  only  of  the  divinity  of  their  mission,  but  of  the 
mission  of  those  who  have  replaced,  and  shall  yet  replace  them  till  the  end  of 
time.  In  religion,  as  evei-y  thing  was  originally  apostolical,  so  every  thing  to 
merit  veneration,  must  continue  tqiostolical.  According  to  the  definition  and 
import  of  apostolicity,  it  is  necessary  that  the  church  which  was  founded  by  the 
apostles,  and  the  mission  also  which  was  imparted  to  the  apostles,  should, 
without  destmction,  or  interruption,  have  been  perpetuated  to  the  age  we  live 
in,  firm  amid  revolutions,  unchanged  amid  changes. 

I  have  said,  that  to  ascertain  in  the  Catholic  church  this  stability  of  duration, 
B  more  positive  proof  cannot  be  adduced,  than  tiie  spectacle  of  its  pastors  (who 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  89 

rompose  a  large  portion  of  its  members,  and  whose  functions  are  the  most  ini- 
portant  duties  of  religion)  regularly  in  each  age,  succeeding  to  each  other,  and 
transmitting  to  each,  the  mission  which  originally  had  been  inherited  from  the 
hands  of  the  apostles.  The  only  difficulty  here,  is  by  the  light  of  evidence  to 
establish  these  important  facts.  Well,  my  bretliren,  and  this  is  what,  without 
any  difiiculiy,  the  Catholic  exults  to  do.  To  do  it  we  need  only  to  consult  the 
records  of  history ;  those  records  which  the  Protestant  himself  considers  authentic. 
The  light  of  history  is  a  testimony,  which,  beyond  the  power  of  reasonable  doubt, 
attests  the  regular  and  perennial  succession  of  the  Catholic  ministry. 

The  apostles,  whom  Christ  had  sent,  as  hia  Father  had  sent  him ;  and  with 
whom,  likewise,  he  had  promised  to  remain  all  days  to  the  end  of  the  world;  in 
consequence  of  the  above  commission  and  assurance,  qhose  for  themselves  co- 
operators  and  successors  in  their  sacred  ministry : — co-operators,  in  order  to 
assist  them  in  the  government  of  the  churches  which  their  zeal  had  planted; — 
$uccessors,  to  whom,  on  occasion  of  their  departure  from  this  scene  of  their 
labors,  they  might  resign  the  burden  of  their  functions,  and  the  honor  of  their 
•ees.  JVovv,  fortunately  for  the  cause  of  religion,  we  have  in  the  annals  of 
history,  and  in  the  writings  of  the  learned,  the  accounts  very  carefully  preserved, 
of  the  resignations,  which  the  apostles  made  of  their  functions  and  sees  to  their 
successors;  and  of  the  resignations  also  which  their  successors'  successors  made, 
during  a  series  of  ages,  to  the  pastors,  who,  in  long  order,  have  till  the  present 
age,  continually  replaced  each  other.  Among  these  accounts,  that  which  of  all 
others  is  the  most  interesting,  and  which  religion  has  preserved  with  the  nicest 
care, is  the  history  of  the  continuation  until  to-day,  of  the  apostolic  powers  which 
Christ  Jesus  conferred  upon  the  prince  of  the  apostles,  St.  Peter.  We  have, 
thanks  to  ttiat  Providence,  which  watches  over  the  church, and  which  marks  its 
paths  with  beams  of  light,  we  have  the  proof  of  this  continuation  so  luminously 
attested,  so  evident,  that  not  hostility  can  contest,  nor  incredulity  doubt  it. 
Important  testimony!  itself  a  bright  feature  in  the  divinity  of  the  church;  a  tes- 
timony, which,  proving  immediately  the  apostolicity  of  the  mission  of  its  si'preme 
pastors,  proves  also  immediately,  yet  directly,  the  apostolicity  of  the  mission  of 
all  its  other  pastors.  For,  if  you  consult  the  rolls  of  history,  you  will  find  that 
with  our  supreme  pastors,  the  Catholic  pastors  of  every  age,  and  of  every  nation, 
were  always  united  in  communion;  acknowledging  their  supereminenre,  and 
revering  their  jurisdictioh ;  considering  them  as  the  great  source,  after  Christ, 
of  spiritual  power,  and  the  centre  of  spiritual  unity. 

There  have  been  several  distinguished  writers,  who,  incapable  of  misrepresen- 
tation, and  possessing  the  means  of  knowing  the  history  of  the  successors  of  St. 
Peter,  and  the  order  of  their  succession,  have  carefully'  handed  down  to  us,  each 
to  bis  own  time,  the  lists  of  these  illustrious  men.  ihe  first  of  these  I  believe, 
who  is  known  to  have  preserved  the  important  catalogue,  is  St.  Irenaeus. 

After  TerluUian,  the  next  who  continues  the  catalogue  of  St.  Peter's  succes- 
sors, is  St.  Optatus.  He  brings  it  down  to  the  time  of  Siricius;  that  is,  to  the 
year  three  hundred  and  eighty-four.  '  In  this  one  chair,'  says  the  saint,  speak- 
ing of  the  seeqf  Rom.e,  *  sat  FeterJirst,to  him  succeeded  Linus, tohim  Clement, 

Sfc To  Liberius  succeeded  Damasus;  to  Damasus,  Hiricius,  the  present 

fonliff,  with  whom,  we  and  all  the  world  hold  communion.  And  now,'  he  adds, 
addressing  himself  exultingly  to  the  Donatist,  'and  now,  do  yov  give  an  account 
of  the  origin  of  your  sees, you,  that  pretend  to  call  yourselves  the  Catholic  church.' 
(Contra  Parmen.) 

St.  Austin  is  anotberwriter,  who  had  attended  to  the  succession,  and  has  preserv- 
ed for  us,  the  list  of  St.  Peter's  successors;  deriving  from  the  long  order  of  their  con- 
tinuance, the  same  conclusions  as  did  Irenaeus,  TertuUian,  and  Optatus.  The  list 
which  the  Saint  has  communicated,  reaches  down  to  his  own  time,  to  the  pontifi- 
cate of  Innocent  the  first,  in  the  year  four  hundred  and  two,  and  in  its  earlier 
eras  it  exactly  corresponded  with  the  list  which  I  have  alluded  to  already, 
*  Come,'  says  he  to  the  Donatists,  *  come,  brethren,  if  it  be  that  you  wish  to  be  in- 
grafted on  the  vine.  1  weep  to  see  you  as  you  are;  lopped  off  from,  its  sacred 
stock.  Count  vp  the  pontiffs  in  the  chair  of  Peter,  and  in  tnat  order  see  which 
succeeded  which.  This  is  that  Rock,  over  which,  the  proud  gates  of  hell  cannot 
prevail.' 

Hence,  without  the  necessity  of  producing  fui-ther  testimonies,  it  follows,  if 
men  will  not  contest  the  authority,  or  call   in  question  the  veracity  of  some  of 
the  fairest  chaj-acters,  that  tlie  chrisi'an  «»'orld  reveres:  it  follows  that  from  tho 
h2  12 


90  DEBATE    ON    THE 

time  of  St.  Peter  to  the  time  of  Innocent,  in  the  fifth  centuiy,  there  eslf.ed  la 
the  see  of  Rome,  an  uninterrupted  chain  of  pastors,  and  a  continuation  of  an 
apostolic  mission.  The  continuation  of  that  same  apostolic  mission  which  Christ 
Jesus  had  imparted  to  St.  Peter.  Only  he,  can  doubt  this,  whose  incredulitj 
doubts  of  every  thing. 

And  has  the  chain  of  Roman  pastor*. — for  this  is  now  the  only  point  which  w« 
must  investigate, — been  continued  and  extended  from  the  time  of  Innocent  the 
first,  to  the  present  day;  an  interval,  it  is  true,  extremely  long-,  and  filled  up  with 
storms,  and  changes,  and  revolutions  and  great  events?  Yes,  the  chain  has  been 
continued  and  extended  all  this  whole  length  of  period ;  from  Innocent,  who 
consoled  the  great  Chrysostom,  under  the  persecution  of  an  ambitious  princess, 
to  Pius  the  seventh,  vgho  himself  is  the  heroic  victim  of  the  persecution  of  a  re- 
lentless victor.  Indeed,  the  fai^  is  so  obvious,  it  is  not  even  contested.  It  i« 
conceded  by  the  meti,  w'no  are  interested  to  deny  it.  To  be  assured  of  it,  you 
need  only  to  consult  the  political  anuals  of  any  considerable  state,  or  to  appeal 
in  our  historians  to  the  mere  tablets  of  chronology.  You  will  find  that  all  give 
to  our  Roman  pontiffs  the  same  Jine  and  lengtli  of  succession,  which  I  hera 
assign  them.  Their  conduct  has  been  always  prominent;  their  iuHuence  alwayt 
conspicuous.  Few  were  the  great  events  and  transactions,  in  which,  eithei 
from  a  principle  of  piety,  or  sometimes  of  ambition,  they  did  not  bear  a  part. 

Yes,  but  if  prompted  by  curiosity,  you  will  give  yourselves  the  trouble  to  con 
suit  the  annals  of  the  church,  there  you  will  trace,  more  distinctly  still,  the  evi 
dence  of  the  truth,  which  I  am  now  establishing.  There  attending  to  the  occur 
fences  of  each  epoch,  you  will  observe,  that  the  helm  which  had  been  confided 
to  the  trust  of  Peter,  is  with  the  greatest  regularity  transferred  from  hand  to 
hand ;  and  with  pious  care,  confided  to  the  trust  of  each  successor.  You  may 
mark  the  name,  and  read  the  character  of  each  individual,  yvhn  directed  it,  the 
date  of  the  daj'  when  it  was  committed  to  his  guidance;  and  the  hour,  almost, 
when  he  resigned.  In  short,  admitting  the  accuracy  of  the  lists  whtc'^  have  been 
preserved  by  Irenaeus,  Tertullian,  &c.,  you  trace  in  the  annals  of  the  church,  a 
clear  plain,  and  incontestible  evidence  of  a  line  of  Roman  pontiffs,  the  succes 
»ors  of  St.  Peter,  during  the  long  course  of  above  eighteen  hundred  3'ears. 

If  the  ancient  fathers,  in  their  times,  and  at  the  distance  only  of  a  (ew  years 
io  triumphantly  produced  the  list  of  these  holy  men,  evincing  by  it  the  divinity 
of  the  church,  and  the  apostolicity  of  the  mission  of  its  pastors,  and  hv  it  confu 
ting  th-?  novelty  and  claims  of  heresy;  if  Tertullian,  impressed  with  tfie  force  of 
this  argument,  victoriously  called  out  to  the  hosts  of  innovators.  "  sheio  lis  any 
thing'  like  this.  Unfold  and  shew  us  the  orig-in  of  your  churches;  shew  us  the  list 
of  your  bishops,  in  regular  order  from  the  days  of  the  apostles,  succeeding  to 
each  other;"  if  he  could  say  to  them,  ••  Who  are  you?  Whence  is  your  origiti  de- 
rived? What  have  you  to  do  in  my  estate?  Jam  the  possessor.  My  posses- 
sionis  ancient.  I  am  the  heir  of  the  apostles:"  if  he  could  say  all  this;  and 
from  this,  after  scarcely  the  lapse  of  two  centuries  and  the  succession  of  hardly 
a  dozen  pontiffs,  demonstrate  the  apostolicity  of  the  church;  with  how  much 
more  reasoil  and  with  how  much  more  effect,  might  I,  or  any  other  Catholic, 
demonstrate  its  apostolicitj'  at  present,  at  present  when  the  continuance  of  Pe- 
ter's successors  forms  a  chain,  of  above  eighteen  hundred  years,  and  their  num- 
ber fills  up  a  list  of  above  two  hundred  and  fifty  pontiffs?  Oh!  were  only  a  Ter- 
tullian now,  or  an  Austin,  standing  in  the  same  situation  in  which  I  am  placed 
before  you,  addressing  you  from  this  seat  of  truth  and  pressing  the  same  argu- 
ment, which  I  do  to  dav,  upon  your  attention;  and  pressing  it  recommended  by 
the  circumstances  which  I  hare  just  referred  to,  how  the  thoughts  would  g  ow, 
and  the  words  burn,  with  which  they  would  convey  the  exultation  of  these  feel- 
ings to  you!  How  the  cause  of  truth  would  triumph  in  their  eloquence!  With 
what  redoubled  enthusiasm  would  they  exclaim,  ".let  heresy  shew  any  thing  like 
this?"  li  reality,  if  the  argument  which  these  great  men  have  employed  to 
prove  the  apostolicity  of  the  church,  proved  aught  in  their  times,  it  certainly 
proves  the  same,  ancf  a  great  deal  more,  at  present. 

To  the  thoughtful  ana  the  philosophic  mind,  there  is  much,  I  have  already  ob- 
terved.  to  admire  in  the  stability  of  the  church  amid  the  fluctuation  of  human 
things.  It  is  the  same  in  regard  to  the  long  continuance  of  the  successors  of  St. 
Peter.  Wisdom  and  reason,  when  they  consider  it.  are  struck  with  wonder  ; 
and  ('iety  discovers  in  it  the  visible  effect  of  an  Almighty  superintendance.  The 
lustilntiotu  of  men  soon  perish.    The  niodificatioos  of  Suman  policy  do  not  long 


fiOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  91 

retain  their  forms.  Nothing  human  is  permanent  To  contemplate,  therefore,  an 
order  of  poutitfs  reaching  the  whole  length  of  eighteen  centuries  unchanged, 
whilst  every  thing  else  was  changing;  uninterrupted,  whilst  all  other  institutions 
were  perishing, — is  a  spectacle  at  once  striking,  awful,  and  impressive  ;  calculat- 
ed to  inspire  the  protestant  himself,  if  not  with  the  conviction  of  its  divinity,  at 
least  with  a  conviction  of  its  wisdom  ;  with  a  respect  for  its  strength  ;  with  a 
veneration  for  its  antiquity.  Let  only  reason  cast  a  look  into  the  annals  of  time, 
or  recall  to  its  recollection  the  events  and  revolutions,  which  during  the  lapse  of 
eighteen  centuries,  have  taken  place  on  the  theatre  of  life.  During  that  interval 
in  every  king  lorn  of  the  civilized  world,  every  government  has  changed  its  form  , 
every  dynasty  resigned  its  power  ;  every  empire  sunk  to  ruin.  Rome  itself,  dur- 
ing it,  has  experienced  in  particular,  all  the  vicissitudes  of  human  instability  : 
Las  been  ruled  alternately  by  Consuls,  £uipcroi-s,  Kings  and  Exarchs  :  has  been 
taken,  plundered,  sacked  and  reduced  almost  to  a  heap  of  ashes.  In  short,  during 
it,  every  thing  that  is  human  and  political, — the  work  of  the  power  and  ambition, 
of  the  wisdom  and  art  of  men,  has  either  perished  or  undergone  a  variety  of  al- 
terations— Kingdoms,  states,  cities,  monuments,  laws,  opinions,  customs,  here- 
sies. Nought  but  the  succession  of  our  pontiHs,  and  the  institutions  of  our  holy 
religion,  ^ave  remained  unaltered.  These  alone,  amid  the  genei-al  revolution  ; 
amid  the  storms  of  war  ;  the  ravages  of  passion  ;  the  conflicts  of  heresy,  subsist 
undecayed  and  uni'.ecaying.  They  even  subsist  in  spite  of  all  those  evils  ; 
though  assailed  by  the  violence  of  persecution  ;  though  combated  by  the  machi- 
nations of  passion  ;  though  attacked  by  the  artificesof  error  ;  though  assaulted  by 
the  combined  ertbrts  of  vice,  Satan  and  the  world.  Surely  prejudice  itself  will 
own  it, — a  succession  of  Pastors  thus  perpetuated  for  eighteen  centurits.and  per- 
petuated amid  such  obstacles,  is  not  the  effect  of  chance,  nor  of  earthly  policy; 
not  the  creation  of  ambition,  nor  the  offspring  of  worldly  wisdom.  The'  only 
method  of  accounting  rationally  for  it,  is  to  allow,  that  it  is  the  resylt  of  a  divine 
institution  ;  and  the  consequence  of  that  assurance  given  by  our  great  Redeemer 
to  his  apostles,  that  he  would  be  with  them  all  days,  to  the  end  of  the  world; — or 
in  other  words,  that  it  is  the  result  and  the  proof  of  an  apostolic  mission. 

From  the  evidences  of  the  apostolicily  of  the  church  of  Rome,  is  inferred  the 
evidence  of  the  apostolicitv  of  the  various  other  Catholic  churches,  which  are 
disp6sed  throughout  the  universe.  In  reality,  they  are  all  of  them  the  parts  of 
one  whole  ;  the  branches  of  one  tree  ;  the  streams  of  one  fountain  ;  the  rays  of 
one  sun.  They  ail  form  only  one  communion,  whose  centre  and  head  is  the 
church  of  Rome.  Of  these  churches,  some  were  established  by  the  apostles 
themselves,  and  their  immediate  successors  ; — some  anda  very  considerable  part, 
by  the  successors  of  St.  Peter,  the  Roman  pontiffs,  who  in  each  age  have  with  pi- 
COS  zeal,  deputed  missionaries  to  preach  the  gospel  in  almost  every  region  of  the 
glooe  But  in  every  age,  and  in  every  region,  the  churches  that  were  thus 
planted,  were  only  considered  as -apostolical,  or  as  portions  of  the  true  church, 
Irom  the  evidence  of  their  union  with  the  church  of  Rome.  It  is  the  remark  of 
St.  Jerome  ;  that  no  bishop  was  ever  acknowledged  to  be  a  lawful  bishop, 
accept  in  as  much,  as  he  was  united  in  communion  with  the  chair  of  St. 
Peter." 

And  why  may  I  not  adduce  as  another  evidence  of  the  apostolic  mission  of 
our  pastors,  the  venerable  subsistence  of  a  multitude  of  other  churches,  which 
without  having  lasted  from  the  age,  which  saw  the  apostles  live,  have  still  lastea 
from  the  ages  thai  are  not  long  subsequent  to  it  1  This  is  the  case  with  severa 
churches  in  Spain,  Italy,  France,  &c.  In  Spain,  the  churches  of  Toledo,  Cordo 
Ta,  &c.  in  Italy,  those  of  Milan,  Naples,  &c.  in  J^rance,  those  of  Lyons  Tours 
&c.  have  subsisted  from  the  early  ages  of  christian  fervor  ;  from  those  ages  which 
are  often  denominated  apostolical,  down  to  the  present  period  of  degeneracy 
Their  annals,  more  accurately  preserved  than  the  annals  of  civil  governments 
exhibit  to  our  astonislied,  but  gratified  reason,  a  line  of  pastors  during  this  whole 
length  of  ages — unbroken  and  uninterrupted — uninjured  by  the  violence  of  per- 
secutions, as  well  as  unimpaired  by  the  sunshine  ot  prosperity  ;  a  line  of  pastors 
that  in  canonical  succession  have  till  the  present  day,  replaced  each  other. 
These  are  monuments  of  stability,  compared  with  which  profane  history  has 
nothing  similar  :  Protestantism  nothing  analogous.  These  too  attest  the  apostol- 
icity  of  the  mission  of  our  pastors  ;  and  the  apostolicitv  consequently  of  our 
i;^Mrch.  Ai.d  now  onte  more,  let  it  be  recollected,  in  relation  to  all  these  churcheH, 
th»t  their  founders,  and  the  successors  of  their  founders,  were  in  communion  with 


02  DEBATE    ON    THE 

the  see  of  Rome: — the  former  deputed  perhaps  immediately  by  it ;  the  latter  ex 
utting;  always  in  their  union  with  it  as  the  best  proof  ol"  the  apostolicity  oftheii 
own  deleo;a_tion." 

f  The  above  quotation  was  read  in  parts,  in  two  different  speeches ;  but  it  has  been 
thought  proper  to  insert  it  entire,  here.] 

I  close  here.  To-morrow  is  the  sabbath  of  our  God.  Let  us  de- 
vote the  remainder  of  the  day  to  the  preparation  of  our  souls  for  its 
holy  duties. 


MONDAY,  Januart  16th,  Half  past  9  o'clock,  J.  M. 
Ma.  Campbell  rises — 

It  is  a  trite  and  a  true  observation,  that  the  material  universe  is  re 
solvable  into  a  very  few  elementary  principles.  And  not  a  few  of  our 
wisest  philosophers  suppose  that  the  time  may  yet  come,  irf'fhe  pro- 
gress of  chemical  science,,  when  material  nature  will  be  resolved  into 
some  two,  or  three  rudimentary  elements.  The  sciences,  too,  mental 
and  moral,  are  all  resolvable  into  a  few  great  cardinal  principles. 

The  papal  empire  itself  depends  also  upon  a  few  points,  indeed,  up- 
on one  great  point,  and  that  relates  to  the  office  upon  which  the  whole 
superstructure  rests.  The  most  fundamental  question  is  not  whether 
the  apostle  Peter  was  invested  with  the  office  of  pope,  or  vicar  of 
Christ ;  but  rather  whether  there  ever  was  such  an  office  at  all.  On  this 
question  we  have  not  proceeded  in  the  most  logical  manner.  I  have 
been  compelled  to  approach  it  at  different  times,  and  by  different  ave- 
nues. My  opponent  has  not  adverted  to  the  rules  of  this  discussion. 
I  am  compelled  to  lead,  and  he  to  follow.  He  can  only  lawfully  reply 
to  such  matter  as  I  introduce.  But  instead  of  replying  to  my  argu- 
ments, already  offered,  he  read  you  some  dissertations  upon  succession 
to  an  office,  not  yet  canvassed  and  established.  This  reading  of  for- 
eign discussions  instead  of  replying  to  me  is  contrary  to  our  rules  and 
most  illogical.  I  hope  we  shall  have  no  more  of  it.  What  was  read 
on  Saturday  afternoon  on  the  question  of  succession  is  clearly  irrele- 
vant. Before  we  contend  about  succession,  the  question  is.  What  is 
to  be  succeeded  to  ?  We  have  had  seven  presidents,  and  the  succes- 
sion is  indisputable;  yet  the  office  depends  not  upon  the  seven  incum- 
bents, nor  upon  their  rightful  succession  ;  but  upon  what  is  written  in 
the  constitution — upon  the  positive  and  express  institution  of  the  office. 

If  it  is  not  found  in  the  constitution,  succession  is  of  no  virtue: 
however  unbroken  and  orderly  it  may  be,  the  present  incumbent  has 
no  power.  The  grand  question  then  is.  Is  there  in  the  constitution  of 
the  Christian  church,  in  the  New  Covenant,  or  last  Testament,  a  chair 
of  primacy,  or  superintendency  ?  This  is  the  logical  and  the  cardinal 
question.  On  this  single  point  rest  all  the  fortunes  of  the  papacy  in 
an  enlightened  community.  I  wish  all  to  perceive  it,  and  I  will  pre- 
sent it  in  different  forms.  The  first  question  is.  Has  Jesus  Christ  ap- 
pointed the  office  of  pope?  The  second.  Who  was  the  first  officer?  Third, 
Was  there  a  succession  ordained?  and  fourth.  Has  that  succession  been 
preserved  uncorrupt  to  the  present  day  ?  In  this  way  our  reason,  or 
common  sense,  or  logic  .arranges  the  matter;  and  in  this  way  only  can 
it  be  rationally  and  scripturally  decided.  With  all  men  of  sense,  the 
controversy  will  hang  on  this  point.    A  failure  here  is  ruin  to  Uie 


XOUAIf   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  93 

cause.  If  this  point  cannot  be  proved,  it  is  as  useless  to  contest  oth- 
ers, as  it  would  be  to  finish  a  house  that  is  built  upon  the  ice.  Strike 
off  the  head  and  the  body  perishes.  Yet  this  capital  point  rests  upon 
an  inference ! 

How  would  an  American  like  to  be  told  that  the  office  of  president 
depended  upon  an  inference  ?  that  there  was  no  provision  for  it  in  the 
constitution — that  it  was  inferred  from  twenty  clauses,  scattered  here 
and  there  in  as  many  sections  1  Could  it  be  possible,  that  the 
greatest  office  in  this  nation — the  very  head  of  this  government,  should 
rest  on  the  construction  of  these  clauses ;  that  there  is  no  chapter  in 
the  constitution,  expressly  creating  the  office  1  Yet,  this  is  precisely 
the  case  with  the  pope.  The  gentleman  does  not  claim  for  him  a  po- 
sitive grant  in  the  New  Testament.  He  must  acknowledge  that  there 
is  no  such  office  distinctly  asserted — that  it  depends  on  the  reasonings 
of  fallible  men  to  ferret  it  out.  Here  I  must  expose  the  nakedness  of 
the  land  and  sweep  from  the  arena  the  dust  of  tradition,  which  blinds 
the  eyes  of  implicit  believers. 

It  is  said  by  the  Romanists  that  a  belief  in  the  supremacy  of  the 
pope  is  essential  to  salvation.  Boniface  VIII.  decrees  in  his  canon 
'aw  in  the  words  following: 

"  Moreover  we  declare,  and  say,  and  define,  and  pronounce  to  every  human 
creature,  that  it  is  altogether  necessarj*  to  salvation  to  be  subject  to  the  Roman 
pontiff.' 

It  appears,  if  not  pedantic,  at  least  awkward  to  read  Latin  to  an 
English  audience.  However,  my  learned  opponent,  so  often  sets  me 
the  example,  that  he  will  allow  me  to  quote  this  important  decree  : 

"  Subesse  Romano  Pontifiei.  omnis  hvman(B  creaturce  declaramus,  dicimus, 
dejinimus,  et  pronuiiciamtn  omnino  esse  necessitate  salutis." 

It  is  then  solemnly  decreed  that  a  belief  in,  and  submission  to,  the 
Roman  pontiff  is  essential  to  salvation.  Ought  not,  then,  his  authority 
to  be  as  clearly  pointed  out  in  the  Bible  as  the  mission  of  Jesus 
Christ  1  for  the  person  and  mission  and  sacrifice  of  Christ  are  to  us 
useless,  wifhont  faith  in  the  pope.  Again,  of  what  use  is  the  Bible, 
without  this  belief;  and  especially,  if  so  important  a  matter  is  so  ob- 
scurely expressed  in  it  as  to  rest  upon  a  mere  inference?  Does  the 
person  and  office  of  Christ  depend  on  a  mere  inference  ?  Is  it  not  as- 
serted and  re-asserted,  a  hundred  times  by  the  voices  of  all  the  pro- 
phets and  apostles  of  both  Testaments  T  In  the  Jewish  economy,  the 
high  Priest  was  on  earth  :  but  in  our  economy  he  is  in  Heaven.  There 
was  truth  in  the  type,  and  there  must  be  truth  in  the  anti-type.  Yet 
every  thing  concerning  that  priesthood  was  positively  and  expressly 
ordained.  The  office,  the  officer,  the  succession,  and  the  means  of 
keeping  the  blood  pure.  For,  No  man  dare  "take  that  office  upon 
himself,  but  he  that  was  called  of  God,  as  was  Aaroii."  Aaron  then 
was  distinctly  called  to  be  a  high  priest.  Now'  we  argue  that  if  we 
had  a  high  priest  on  earth  under  our  high  Priest  in  heaven,  and  if  salva- 
tion hang  upon  obedience  to  him:  it  ought  to  be  as  clear  as  that  of  Aaron. 

But  in  reference  to  the  Old  Testament  priesthood,  we  find  every 
thing  distinctly  and  unequivocally  stated.  Exodus  xxviii.  1.  "Take 
Aaron  and  his  sons  from  among  the  children  of  Israel,  that  he  and  they 
may  minister  to  me  in  the  priest's  office."  Again,  xl.  13.  "And  thou 
shah  sanctify  Aaron  and  his  sons,  that  he  may  minister  to  me  in  the 
priest's  office;  and  their  anointing  shall  surely  be  an  everlasting prieat- 
hood  throughout  their  getieralions.^^     How  often  in  the  books  of  tho 


94  DEBATE   ON    THE 

law,  and  in  the  subsequent  history  of  the  Jews,  as  it  is  in  1  Chron.  23d 
and  24th  chapters,  do  we  find  the  unequivocal  institution  and  records 
of  this  priesthood  ! 

But  it  is  not  only  in  a  distinct  and  unequivocal  call  and  consecra- 
tion, but  in  the  subsequent  care  evinced  in  sustaining  this  appoint- 
ment, that  we  see  the  necessity  of  such  a  positive  and  express  cove- 
nant and  understanding.  The  rebellion  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram, 
and  the  destruction,  by  a  miraculous  interposition,  of  themselves  and 
of  their  company,  together  with  two  hundred  and  fifty  princes  of  Israel, 
for  seeking  to  invade  the  office,  is  another  solemn  attestation  of  the 
divine  erection  of  this  office,  and  the  certain  call  of  Aaron's  family. 

Again:  The  appointment  of  God  to  select  an  almond  rod  for  each 
tribe,  and  to  inscribe  the  name  of  each  of  the  twelve  families  upon 
those  rods,  every  tribe's  name  upon  a  separate  rod,  and  the  miraculous 
budding  and  blossoming  and  almond-bearing  of  Aaron's  rod,  in  the 
course  of  a  single  night,  was  another  settlement  of  this  matter,  so  spe- 
cial, supernatural,  and  divine,  as  to  put  it.  to  rest  for  ever.  Here  we 
ought  to  read  in  full  the  16th  and  17th  chapters  of  Numbers;  but  we 
have  only  time  to  refer  to  them.  Thus  by  a  positive  call,  and  two 
splendid  and  awfully  glorious  miracles,  was  the  office  of  the  high 
priesthood  established  in  Israel. 

And  may  we  not  ask,  that  if  as  Boniface  has  drfined,  and  all  Roman 
Catholics  believe,  '  that  there  is  no  salvation,  hut  in  the  admission  of  the 
divine  call  of  the  popes  of  Rome;''  ought  not  the  institution  of  a  new 
order  to  be  as  clearly  pomted  out,  and  sustained  in  the  new  law,  as  it 
was  in  the  old?  ! 

But  my  opponent  has  to  concede  that  there  is  no  such  positive  or 
express  institution  of  St.  Peter's  chair,  nor  of  his  call  and  consecra- 
tion, nor  any  law  of  succession  whatever  in  the  New  Testament;  and 
that  it  rests  wholly  upon  inference.  Now.  if  no  man  can  take  this 
honor  upon  himself,  but  he  that  is  called  of  God,  as  was  Aaron,  where 
is  the  office  and  the  authority  of  the  popes  of  Rome  ?  !  There  is  for  it 
no  such  call.  Or  will  my  friend  say  that  mere  inference  or  assump- 
tion is  a  proper  foundation  for  such  a  call  and  office? 

On  Saturday  evening  I  began  the  examination  of  the  premises  from 
which  is  inferred  this  high  and  responsible  office ;  and  so  far,  I  think, 
proved  that  he  cannot  even  find  a  good  logical  inference  for  it.  In 
Matthew  xvi.  we  found  no  support  to  the  idea  that  the  church  of  Jesus 
Christ  was  to  be  built  upon  the  flesh  and  blood  and  bones  of  Peter; 
neither  upon  his  person  nor  office.  We  saw  that  every  rule  of  gram- 
mar— that  the  construction  of  language  forbade  such  a  transition  as 
was  necessary  to  the  hypothesis.  To  have  addressed  Peter  in  the 
second  and  third  persons  as  both  present  and  absent,  in  the  same 
breath,  is  wholly  unprecedented.  To  have  spoken  of  him,  and  to 
him  at  one  time,  in  one  period,  and  on  a  matter  so  cardinal  as  making 
him  the  foundation  of  his  church,  is  not  to  be  admitted  on  the  autho- 
rity of  mere  assumption,  without  a  single  case  parallel  in  all  holy  writ 
to  lay  along  side  of  it. 

The  case  in  no  rational  point  of  view  will  endure  such  violence. 
Jesus  asked  for  a  confession,  Peter  gave  it.  Th  ;  conversation  turned 
upon  that  confession,  and  not  upon  Peter.  The  comment  ought  to 
have  been  upon  the  text,  and  not  upon  him  that  gave  it.  It  was  upon 
the  text  and  not  unon  the  preacher. 


EOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  96 

We  Protestants  say  that  the  church  is  founded  on  the  thing  con- 
fessed.    Christ  himself  is,  indeed,  the  rock;  hut  figuratively  the  truths 
which  represents  him.     I  was  struck  with  astonishment  when  I  heard 
my  worthy  opponent  say,  that  Peter  was  the  rock,  and  Christ  only  a 
stone  in  this  spiritual  temple ! 

[Bishop  Purcell  here  explained,  '  that  he  had  said  that  Christ  was 
the  corner  stone  which  was  to  strengthen  and  give  consistency  to  the 
foundation;  and  Peter  the  rock  which  was  to  strengthen  and  give  con- 
sistency to  the  superstructure.']     Mr.  Campbell  proceeded  : 

Christ  the  corner  stone!  and  Peter  the  rock! !  Does  this  help  the 
matter  1 

What  says  1  Cor.  iii.  "Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  what 
5s  already  laid," — very  Peter !  ^  No,  indeed;  hut  Jesus  Christ  him- 
self is  the  corner  stone,  the  rock,  the  foundation  ?  Then  Peter  is  but 
a  stone,  as  his  name  imports.  But  there  were  eleven  other  stones  of 
equal  value:  for,  says  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  church  is  built  upon  the 
foundation  of  the  apostles — all  the  apostles ;  and  of  the  prophets  too ! 
When,  then,  all  these  stones  are  at  the  foundation,  and  Christ  the  chief 
corner,  where  is  the  room  for  Peter  the  rock  ■? 

But,  we  have  other  expressions  that  illustrate  Matthew  xvi.  Look- 
ing at  the  temple  one  day,  Jesus  said  to  those  before  him,  "Destroy 
■this  temple  and  I  will  build  it  again  in  three  days."  Were  the  per- 
sons he  addressed  in  the  second  person  and  the  temple  the  same  thing?  _ 
Here,  then,  are  the  persons  addressed,  the  subject  of  conversation,  and 
himself — you,  (the  addressed,)  and  the  temple,  (himself.)  So  have 
we  Peter,  his  confession,  and  Christ  the  builder  of  the  church,  in  the 
passage  before  us.  They  understood  by  his  question  that  he  spoke  of 
hiftbody;  but  his  body  was  not  himself:  neither  was  the  confession 
of  Peter,  Christ  himself;  nor  Peter's  person,  the  rock  of  ages.  Surely 
the  papal  rock  is  not  as  our  rock ;  our  enemies  themselves  being  judges. 

Bat  petros  and  petra  sound  alike,  and  therefore,  though  of  different 
gender,  case,  and  person,  they  must  be  identical!  Of  the  person  and 
case  we  have  said  enough,  (for  my  friend  has  not  attempted  to  refute 
it.)  Of  the  difference  in  gender,  he  will  tell  us,  that  it  was  written  in 
Syriac,  and  that  the  word  signifying  stone  in  that  language  is  of  no 
gender.  This  is  gratuitous.  He  can  produce  no  copy  of  Matthew  in 
Syriac;  the  only  authentic  copy  we  have  is  that  before  me.  It  is  the 
Greek  version  of  Matthew  :  "  7%ou"  is  in  the  second  person,  and  "/A?s" 
is  in  the  third.  Pe/ros  is  masculine  and  Pe/ra  is  feminine.  It  is  impos- 
sible for  language  to  do  more  to  prevent  mistake;  and  he  that  would 
attempt  to  explain  away  these  three — gender,  person  and  case,  is  not 
subject  to  the  laws  of  language,  neither  indeed  can  be. 

It  is  commonly  observed  that  Peter  seems  not  to  have  been  any  bet- 
ter qualified  after  than  before  the  confession,  to  be  the  foundation  of  the 
church  :  for  he  is  reproved  for  his  worldly  notions  of  the  Messiah  and 
his  kingdom,  in  these  words  ;  "  Get  thee  behind  me,  adversaryi  for  thou 
relishest  not  the  things  of  God  ;  but  the  things  of  man."  The  word  sa- 
ianas  signifies  adversary.  Jesus  calKhim  not  ho  satanas,  Satan  ;  hut 
simply  opponent.  Stand  aside  thou  who  opposest  me  in  this  matter  : 
.Thou  dost  not  understand  these  divine  things. 

There  is  another  of  the  bishop's  texts  to  which,  out  of  courtesy,  I 
must  allude:  "  Peter,  when  thou  art  converted,  confirm  your  breth- 
ren."   The  meaning  of  which  is, — Peter,  as  you  have  experienced  the 


9b  DEBATS   ON   THE 

bitterness  ot  repentance,  you  can  hereafter  comfort  and  strengthen  youf 
penitent  hrethren.  My  learned  opponent  interprets  it  thus  ;  Peter, 
when  you  are  converted,  you  shall  he  my  vicar  and  prince  of  the  apostles  ! 

John  xxi,  "Lovest  thou  me  more  than  these,"  is  again  before  us.  The 
bishop  will  have  these  to  refer  to  the  apostles.  My  audience  will  re- 
member that  when  I  read  the  Greek  of  the  passage,  he  quoted  Latin 
{plus  quam  hos,)  as  if  to  correct  the  Greek  by  deciding  that  these  was 
masculine  and  not  neuter,  the  very  point  in  debaie— that  when  he  was 
challenged  to  sustain  his  Latin  comment  by  the  original,  he  immedi- 
ately after  taking  up  the  Greek  Testament  laid  it  down. 

It  will  elucidate  this  passage  to  read  the  whole  in  the  original,  verse 

13th.  .       ,      *         . 

B.f^tritt  0  'lifTouf  ji<i  \iuCdnt  tcv  ogTsr,  »*!  SU'otiTii  atiToTc,  xsuto  l^ptor  o/uiout- 
In  reference  to  which  Jesus  says,  2/^»y  ]»k*,  tfynTrac  /ut  xrxuoi  fcvrai-y 
The  grammatical  antecedent  to  Tawreey  must  be  tci  &^toy  and  to 
c4a'«!ir,  which  makes  it  neuter.  Now,  I  ask,  on  what  grammatical 
authority  does  the  Vulgate  convert  these  into  the  masculine? 
Ought  a  translator  to  judge  for  his  readers,  or  ought  he  to  give 
the  same  latitude  of  inquiry  to  his  readers  which  the  original  gives  to 
him.  The  latter,  certainly.  So  decides  the  highest  tribunal  in  the 
commonwealth  of  letters.  And  neither  my  opponent  nor  his  Latin 
nor  Greek  supplements,  nor  interpolations,  have  any  right  to  make  that 
jnasculine,  which  the  original  makes  at  least  doubtful,  himself  being 
judge  :  and  according  to  my  judgment,  on  the  laws  of  language,  cer- 
tainly, neuter. 

On  what  precarious,  inferential  and  illogical  grounds  rest  the  proud 
aspirations  of  the  pope  of  Rome  !  He  out-rivals  the  proudest  mon- 
archs  of  the  east.  He  that  styles  himself  "  brother  to  the  sun  aad 
moon,"  and  "  disposer  of  Asiatic  crowns,"  is  modest  compared  with 
the  vicar,  who  claims  dominion  over  angels  and  saints  in  heaven — 
over  all  the  spirits  in  the  wide  domains  of  purgatory  ;  who  styles  him- 
self, or  permits  others  to  address  him  as  a  God  on  earth — as  "  his  holi- 
ness. Lord  God  the  Pope,"  as  holding  the  keys  of  heaven  and  hell,  and 
the  two  swords  of  ecclesiastic  and  political  justice  ;  and  all  this  mighty 
empire  resting  upon  the  words,  "petra,"  "  strengthen  thy  brethren," 
"  lovest  thou  me  more  than  these,"  ^'■fetd  my  sheep  and  lambs,"  &c. 
Was  there  ever  so  proud  a  superstructure  reared  upon  so  many  and 
so  baseless  assumptions  1! 

The  gentleman  quoted  yet  another  verse  from  the  Vulgate  ;  1  Pet 
V.  3,  "  Be  not  lords  over  the  clergy."  Hence  he  infers,  the  apostle  Pe- 
ter  had  the  clergy  under  him.  But  the  apostle  says,  "  not  as  lords 
ver  the  clergy,"  there  then,  was  a  plurality  of  lords, — not  one'su- 
preme  head  !  Although  this  passage  was  quoted  at  an  early  period 
of  the  discussion,  by  my  opponent,  I  reserved  my  remarks  upon  it  till 
now.  It  reads  in  the  original  and  the  common  version,  "  not  as  lords 
over  the  heritage,  lot,  or  people  of  the  Lord."  KX)Tg5c,  the  word  here 
translated  clergy,  occurs  twelve  times  in  the  New  Testament,  and  in 
nine  of  these  it  is  translated  lot.  In  Acts,  xxvi.  18,  and  in  Col.  i.  12, 
it  is  translated  inheritance,  and  in  the  passage  before  us,  it  may  be 
either  lot,  heritage,  or  inheritance  .•  but  clergy  is  most  whimsical  and 
aroitrary.  As  well  might  the  Vulgate  have  said  to  Simon  Magus, 
*'  thou  hast  neither  part  nor  clergy  in  this  matter:"  or,  in  Col.  i.  12, 
*'  he  has  fitted  us  to  partake  in  the  clergy  of  the  saints."     In  both 


KOSIAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  97 

cas«s  the  word  is  the  same  in  the  original.  These  shew  by  what 
a  stretch  of  power  and  arbitrary  dominion  over  words,  these  critics 
would  bring  the  clergy  or  christian  ministry  under  the  bishop  of  Rome. 
So  fades  from  the  face  of  reason  the  whole  evidence  from  the  Bible,  in 
fever  of  the  grand  office  without  which  the  papacy  is  as  mere  a  fig- 
ment of  fancy  as  the  visions  of  ihe  prophet  of  Islamism  ! 

Having  found  the  office  of  vicar,  or  general  saperintendant  of  th« 
whole  church,  the  universal  episcopate  of  Rome,  without  express  or 

risitive  precept  or  institution,  and  without  even  inferential  probability; 
proceed  in  the  third  place  to  show  still  farther,  that  it  is  anti-scrip- 
•tutal,  not  only  in  theory,  hut  in  the  facts  recorded. 

I  have  said  that  the  first  church  was  the  Hebrew.  It  was  catholic 
nnd  apostolic  :  for  all  the  twelve  apostles  were  in  it.  This  cannot 
be  said  of  any  other  society  that  ever  existed.  The  whole  college  of 
the  twelve  apostles  had  their  seat  in  Jerusalem.  The  Samaritan 
daughter  of  Jerusalem  was  the  first  fruits  out  of  Judea.  i^hilip,  one  of 
the  apostles'  evangelists,  carried  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  Samaria. 
They  had  believed,  repented,  and  been  baptized.  News  is  brought  to  Je- 
rusalem. The  cardinals  all  meet. — The  twelve  apostles  are  in  session. 
But  where  is  Peter's  chair  1  The  prince  of  the  apostles,  the  vicar  of 
Christ,  had  not  yet  learned  his  duty,  and  his  brethren  had  not  yet 
learned  to  call  him  pope.  The  fact  is,  they  made  a  legate  of  him. 
They  sent  two  legates  to  Jerusalem.  And  who  do  you  think  were  the 
two  first  apostolic  legates  1  They,  indeed  sent  pope  Peter  and  his  broth- 
er John  !!  Thus  it  is  clear  that  the  notion  of  Peter's  universal  episco- 
pacy, and  princeship  of  the  apostles  was  not  yet  conceived.  This  fact 
speaks  a  volume  against  the  pretended  successors  of  Peter. 

But — again,  and  still  more  humiliating  to  his  successors,  when  Peter 
had  introduced  the  Gentiles  into  the  church,  the  brethren  of  the  circum- 
cision rose  up  en  masse  against  him,  not  regarding  him  as  having  the 
least  supreme  authority  in  the  case.  "  How,"  do  you  ask,  "did  Peter 
receive  the  complaints  from  all  quarters  for  his  daring  to  innovate,  by 
mere  authority  on  all  the  holy  brethren  1  Did  he  say,  I  am  Christ's 
vicar— -chief  of  the  apostles, — the  supreme  head  of  the  church — I  hold 
the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  and  do  you  demand  of  me,  why  / 
should  act  thus"  1!  Never  thus,  spoke  Peter.  He  did  not  assume  any 
thing  :  but  tells  the  matter  over,  and  shows  how  God  had  opened  the 
door  of  faith  to  the  Gentiles  ;  "  and  what  was  I,"  he  reasons,  "  that  I 
should  withstand  God  ?"  Ought  I  to  have  stood  up  and  said  to  the 
Gentiles,  you  shall  not  enter  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  nor  be  en- 
rolled amongst  the  children  of  God?^In  the  11th  chapter  of  the  Acts 
of  the  apostles,  we  have  a  full  exposition  of  the  groundless  pietension 
of  his  successors,  in  the  details  of  tiiis  case  from  the  lips  of  the  apos- 
tle himself.  A  third  instance  of  the  entire  absence  of  all  such  vicars 
in  the  primitive  church,  appears  in  the  "  council  held  at  Jerusalem." 
So  the  bishop's  party  designate  it,  and  for  the  sake  of  argument,  let  it 
be  a  council.  * 

It  was  not  called  by  Peter  the  pope,  nor  was  it  a  council  of  the 
whole  world:  but  of  two  or  three  churches.  Well,  they  met.  Who 
was  president  1  Neither  the  pope  nor  his  legates.  Peter  is  not  in  the 
chair;  hut  on  the  floor.  He  spoke  first,  as  he  was  always  accustomed 
to  do:  but  did  he  dictate  the  course  to  be  pursued?  No.  Had  he  the 
honor  of  drafting  or  submitting  the  decrees  ?  He  had  Hot.  He  arose 
I  7 


9S  -  DEBATK    Oy    THE 

and  spoke  to  the  assembly,  and  told  what  God  had  donebyhnn  among 
the  Gentiles.  Paul  and  Barnabas,  also  on  the  floor,  then  stated  what 
the  Lord  had  done  by  them  among  the  Gentiles,  and  when  they  had 
done,  James  arose  to  present  his  views.  "  Mj/  sentence  as"  says  he, 
"  that  we  ought  to  write  so  and  so  to  the  Gentiles."  In  his  views  they 
all  apquiesced.  They  do  not  say  in  this  letter,  "it  seemed  good  to 
Peter !"  No,  "  it  seemed  good  to  us."  Indeed,  if  any  was  pope  in 
this  assembly,  it  was  James :  not  Peier.  All  the  popes  of  Home  as 
successors  of  Peter,  are  therefore  not  only  unscriptural ;  but  anti-scrip* 
tural. 

Again,  and  stronger  still.  In  Gal.  1st  chap,  we  are  told  of  a  cer- 
tain controversy  between  Paul  and  Peter, — not  about  faith,  nor  moral- 
ity; but  about  expediency.  Paul  never  would  have  related  this  mat- 
ter :  but  in  self-defence.  There  were  some  in  Galatia  that  regardect 
him  as  a  sub-apostle,  not  equal  to  those  who  had  been  companions  ot 
the  Lord  duriiig  his  public  ministry.  In  self-defence,  he  affirms  that, 
in  conversations  with  the  pillars,  as  some  called  Peter  and  James  and 
John — three  of  the  oldest  apostles — he  did  not  receive  a  new  idea.  So 
far  from  being  dependant  on  Peter,  or  inferior  to  him,  he  was  the  only 
apostle  in  those  days  with  whom  Paul  had  the  slightest  dissension  : 
"for,"  says  he,  "after  Peter  came  down  to  Antioch  I  withstood  him  to 
the  id.ce,  fur  he  was  to  be  blamed:  for  before  certain  persons  came  fromi 
James,  he  did  eat  with  the  Gentiles ;  but  when  they  were  come,  he 
withdrew  and  separated  from  ihem,  fearing  the  Jews.  And  tiie  other 
Jews  dissembled  likewise  with  him,  insomuch  that  Barnabas  was  car- 
riod  away  with  their  dissimulation.  Seeing  that  they  walked  not  up- 
rightly, I  said  to  Peter  in  the  presence  of  them  all ;  "  Why  do  you  com- 
pel the  Gentiles  to  live  as  do  the  Jews  ]"  Thus  Paul  reproved  the 
head  of  the  church,  hia  father,  pope  Peter,  in  the  presence  of  all  the 
brethren  for  a  sort  of  temporizing  expediency  in  its  practical  details, 
squinting  at  dissimulation.  All  these  facts  show  how  contrary  to  the 
doctrine  and  facts  of  the  sacred  writings  are  the  assumptions  of 
popery. 

A  word  or  two  from  the  last  will  and  testament  of  the  apostle  Peter, 
Being  far  advanced  in  y^ars  he  writes  two  letters  containing  his  last 
advice  to  the  brethren,  in  the  first  he  associates  himself  with  the  el 
ders  of  the  Jewish  church,  and  claims  no  other  eminence  than  that  of 
fellow  elder,  and  as  such  exhorts  them  to  feed  the  flock  of  God  wil- 
lingly. In  the  second  letter,  he  wills,  that  the  brethren  addressed, 
"should,  after  his  decease,  be  mindful  of  the  commandment  of  ms,  the 
apostles  of  the  Lord  and  Savior."  Thus,  with  his  last  words,  he  dis- 
claims every  attribute  of  officieil  supremacy.  He  is  known  only  in  the 
New  Testament,  as  an  apostle,  either  from  his  own  words  simply,  oi 
those  of  Paul,  or  from  any  other  circumstance,  which  in  the  history  of 
the  church  is  recorded  from  Pentecost  to  the  end  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. I  shall  leave  other  scriptures  for  the  calls  of  my  opponent,  and 
the  occasion.        •  • 

I  now  proceed  to  show  that  as  there  is  no  foundation  in  scripture, 
so  there  is  none  in  fact,  nor  in  reason,  for  the  papal  supremacy.  I 
have  shown,  that  it  wants  positive  proof — that  it  is  built  on  inference— 
that  this  inference  is  not  found  in  the  premises — and  that  other  scrip- 
tural facts  and  documents  preclude  the  possibility  of  such  an  infereuco 

We  have  emphatically  stated,  that  the  first  point  is  to  establish  the 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  99 

off  ce.  If  there  is  no  office,  there  can  be  no  officer.  But  my  friend  the 
bishop's  system  is  still  more  at  fault,  for  if  he  could  prove  (what  he 
never  will)  that  there  was  such  an  office;  still  he  has  to  prove  thai 
Peter  was  the  first  officer. — That  Pefer  was  that  officer  is  as  cardinal 
a  point  to  his  system,  as  that  the  papal  office  had  been  set  up  by  Jesus 
Christ.  The  Scriptures  are  perfectly  jnute  on  that  point !  What  says 
church  history  1  It  is  only  inferred  that  Peter  ever  was  in  Rome!  It 
is  only  probable.  Barronius  only  says  it  is  probable  he  had  a  see 
there :  he  does  not  moot  that  question.  There  is  not  a  single  word  in 
»ll  antiquity  which  positively  asserts  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  of  Mome, 
or  was  ever  in  Rome.  The  gentleman  quoted  Irenaeus.  Can  he  quote 
the  original  ?  I  affirm  that  it  does  not  exist :  and  even  the  copy  from 
which  he  read  was  not  found  for  centuries  after  Irenaeus  wrote.  But 
admit  it  to  be  genuine.  I  affirm  that  Irenaeus  no  where  asserts,  that  Pc 
ier  was  bishop  of  Rome.  If  neither  he  nor  his  contemporaries  assert  it, 
what  is  the  authority  of  Grotius,  or  Casaubon,  or  Usher  or  such  mod- 
ern authors  1 !  It  proves  nothing.  The  assertion  of  my  present  opponent 
is  worth  as  much  as  that  of  any  man  who  has  lived  for  a  thousand  years, 
to  prove  an  event  which  happened  a  thousand  years  before  he  was 
born. 

The  bishop  and  his  friend  the  editor  of  the  Catholic  paper  and  at 
least  fifteen  hundred  citizens  heard  me  lecture  when  last  in  the  city ; 
and  yet,  so  faithless  is  tradition,  that  I  have  seen  it  stated  in  a  print 
of  this  city — in  a  Roman  Catholic  Telegraph,  too,  that  I  had  asserted 
as  a  proposition  to  be  proved,  "  that  Charles  Carroll,  of  Carrollton  was 
not  a  Roman  Catholic  .'" — words  that  never  fell  from  my  lips  or  pen. 
If  then  tradition  cannot  be  kept  here  for  a  single  week,  in  this  day  of 
light  and  knowledge,  and  good  faith,  how  can  you  respect  and  believe 
traditions  descending  through  ages  of  darkness  and  superstition  1 — 
why  bring  up  men  from  the  remote  corners  of  the  earth,  who  lived 
more  than  a  century  after  the  time  in  question,  to  tell  us  their  hear-saya 
or  the  rumors  of  past  ages. 

I  have  affirmed,  that  there  is  no  docu*ment  to  prove  that  Peter  was 
ever  bishop  of  Rome.  My  friend  disputes  this  point ;  we  are  then  at 
issue,  and  this  is  a  vital  point.  Let  him  then  meet  me  upon  it,  and 
decide  the  controversy.  Irenaeus  says  not,  that  either  Peter  or  Paul 
was  bishop  of  Rome ;  but,  "  over  that  church  that  was  planted  by  Peter 
and  Paul  sat  Linus."  True,  the  inference  is,  that  Peter  and  Paul  must 
have  been  at  Rome  ;  if  not,  how  believe  that  the  church  was  planted 
by  them  1  But  the  church  at  Rome  never  was  planted  by  them.  The 
faith  of  the  Romans  was  known  through  all.  the  earth  when  Paul  wrote 
his  letter  to  them,  and  at  that  time  he  had  never  been  in  that  city.  The 
proposition  is  therefore  not  true;  and  Irenaeus,  if  he  wrote  so,  wrote 
on  erroneous  tradition,  and  is  not  worthy  of  credit.  Admit,  foi  argu- 
ment sake,  that  we  take  the  testimony  of  the  fathers  on  the  succession, 
which  are  we  to  believe  1  They  tell  us  stories  irreconcilably  dif- 
ferent. The  gentleman  triumphantly  held  up  a  map,  as  if  there  were 
some  hidden  virtue  in  it,  and  said  he  could  speak  upon  it  till  dooms- 
day. I  have  also  a  map  here,  which  will  prove  that  his  map  can 
prove  nothing  without  a  tongue  in  it;  and  if  holding  up  this  map  be- 
fore you  could  convince  you,  I  should  soon  carry  tlie  point.  Bellar- 
mine  admits,  that  the  fathers  contradict  each  other  on  the  succession  of 
the  fiirt  popes.   A  phalanx  of  authors  can  be  adduced  to  prove  that  the 


100  DEBATE    ON    THE 

fathers  are  not  unanimous  upon  any  one  point  of  importance,  on  that 
or  any  other  dogma  of  the  papacy. 

Divine  authority  cannot  exist,  but  in  the  holy  oracles :  against  any 
other  pretended  infallible  standard,  all  men  should  protest.  The 
fathers  agreed  in  bearing  testimony  to  the  scriptures,  as  far  as  they 
individually  knew  them ;  but  their  unanimous  consent  on  any  thing 
else  has  not  yet  been  found. 

Justin  Martyr,  for  example,  proves  my  interpretation  of  the  16th 
ch.  Matthew,  on  the  rock.  He  is  one  of  the  primitive  fathers.  He 
gives  substantially  the  same  views  of  that  whole  passage  as  1 
have  adduced  here.  Now  it  is  impossible  for  my  opponent  to  find  a 
unanimous  consent  of  the  fathers  with  him,  as  I  have  Justin  Martyr, 
of  the  second  century,  and  many  others,  with  me.  My  standing  argu- 
ment, on  the  consent  of  the  fathers,  is  this  : 

I  find  many  of  the  fathers  unequivocally  agreeing  with  me.  Tlieae, 
therefore,  must  express  the  unanimous  consent,  if  there  be  any  ,•  for  it  can- 
not be  unanimous  without  them.  Now,  if  there  be  no  utianimous  consent, 
the  Romanists  build  upon  a  false  foundation ;  and  if  there  be,  they  build 
on  a  false  foundation ;  for  we  have  that  consent,  not  they. 

But  this  unanimous  consent  fails  in  the  succession.  Admitting  that 
Peter  was  first  bishop  of  Rome,  no  living  man  can  tell  whether  Linus 
or  Clement  was  the  second  bishop  of  Rome.  The  ancients  do  not 
agree  upon  that  point.  Tertullian  makes  Clement  second  bishop,  and 
others  make  Linus.  I  have  a  chart,  in  Eusebius,  which  differs  from 
his  own  history  in  various  points.  I  have  other  charts  and  indexes 
that  place  the  bishops  of  Rome  in  a  different  order.  Eusebius  does 
not  place  Peter  first;  nor  do  any  of  the  fathers.  He  places  Linus  first, 
then  Clitus,  then  Clement.  Another  tells  us,  that  Peter  was  first,  then 
Linus,  then  Clement.  A  fourth,  perhaps,  on  the  authority  of  the  last, 
places  Peter  first  and  Clement  second. — [Time  expired.] 

Half  past  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Bishop  Pttrcell  rises — 

It  is  well,  beloved  friends,  to  keep  our  eyes  upon  the  polar  star, 
when  once  we  have  embarked  upon  the  sea  of  controversy.  The 
polar  star  of  this  question,  is  the  attempted  disproof,  by  my  learned 
friend,  of  the  Roman  Catholic  claim,  to  be  the  holy,  apostolic,  catholic 
church.  He  was  pledged  to  show  her  to  be  an  apostacy  from  the  only 
true  church.  Has  he  proved  this  ?  Is  there  one  intelligent  man  in 
this  assembly  prepared  to  answer  this  question  in  the  affirmative  \ 
I  asked,  from  what  church  was  she  an  apostacy  ?  He  told  us  that  she 
had  apostatized  in  the  year  1054.  But  he  has  not  yet  told  us  what 
or  where  was  the  one  true  holy  and  apostolic  church  from  w^hich  she 
seceded.  There  was  a  good  reason  for  it:  no  other  catholic  church 
existed  at  the  epoch  indicated,  but  ours,  the  Roman  Catholic.  We 
were  then  taken  to  the  year  250,  or  some  time  thereabout.  These 
were  indefinite  words  ;  and  I  ask  again  what  and  where  was  the  true 
church  from  which  she  apostatized  in  250  ?  Has  he  informed  you  1 
we  were  referred  to  the  Novatians — ^and  a  Protestant  church  historian 
Mosheim,  tells  us — 

[Mr.  Campbell  here  called  Bishop  Purcell  to  order  as  not  speaking 
to  the  point;  the  moderators  decided  that  he  was  in  order  and  he  pro- 
ceeded.] The  gentleman  cannot  confuse  me  by  these  interruptions. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  10 1 

My  eye  is  on  the  star.  I  say,  that  Mosheim,  a  Protestant  ecclesiasti- 
cal historian  tells  us  that  the  Novatians  embraced  essential  errors.  I 
have  quoted  from  that  historian,  for  this  sect  and  all  other  prominent 
sects,  to  the  beginning  of  the  16th  century.  They  taught  some  doc- 
trines which  Catholics,  and  some,  which  Protestants  hold.  They 
taught  some  errois  which  Catholics  and  Protestants  agree  to  reject— 
they  taught  disorganizing  doctrines,  which  armed  the  civil  power 
both  Catholic  and  Protestant  against  them — and  these  doctrines,  Ca- 
tholics and  Protestants  mutually  abhor.  They  were  not  then  united, 
pure,  or  apostolic.  They  were  not  the  church  of  Christ.  The  ques- 
tion then  reverts  upon  us — which  was  the  church  of  Christ,  from 
which  the  Roman  Catholic  church  separated  in  the  3d  century  1 

I  now  come  at  once  to  the  last  speech  of  the  gentleman. — I  have 
already  agreed  that  this  controversy  is  resolvible  mto  two  or  three 
g^and  principles — and  by  the  discussion  of  these  we  may  succeed 
m  ascertaining  their  ulterior  consequences.  If  true  that  Christ  has 
established  a  head  of  the  Church  on  earth,  it  follows  that  we  must 
recognize  that  head.  So  far  we  are  right.  If  Peter  was  made  that 
head,  we  are  right.  If  Peter  was  to  have  successors,  we  are  right. 
If  that  succession  was  to  last  to  the  end  of  time,  we  are  right,  for 
we  hold  these  propositions  to  be  irrefragable.  If  on  the  contrary, 
these  propositions  could  be  satisfactorily  proved  to  be  untrue,  the 
Catholics  would  be  wrong. 

I  have  proved  the  first  of  these,  viz.  that  Peter  was  made  the  head 
of  the  church,  by  Christ,  from  scripture.  And  what  has  my  friend 
discovered  to  weaken  the  force  of  the  numerous  and  strong  texts  1 
have  adduced, — the  rock,  the  keys,  the  feeding  of  the  lambs,  and  ot 
the  sheep  whom  the  lamljs  are  wont  to  follow,  the  prayer  of  Christ 
that  Peter's  faith  should  never  fail,  the  charge  given  him  by  Christ 
to  confirm  his  brethren,  his  confession  of  the  divinity  of  Christ  be- 
fore the  other  apostles,  and  the  Blessedness  pronounced  on  him  for 
that  confession  by  Christ,  the  deference  shewn  him — the  poor  illiterate 
fisherman,  by  Paul,  imbued  with  the  sublimest  lessons  of  the  Law  at 
the  feet  of  Gamaliel,  &c.  &c.?  Why  he  says :  "  Peter,  lovest  thou  me 
more  than  these  fish  !" 

My  friends,  I  know  not  how  to  treat  this  interpretation  seriously. 
But  since  the  gentleman  is  so  curious  an  interpreter,  let  us  see  if  the 
text  will  bear  him  out.  After  the  miracle  of  the  draught  of  fishes, 
the  apostles,  at  Christ's  invitation,  proceeded  to  some  distance  from 
their  nets  and  barks,  for  the  purpose  of  dining.  It  is  natural  to  sup- 
pose they  selected,  for  dinner,  no  more  of  the  fish  they  had  taken, 
than  they  would  probably  eat.  Can  my  friend  say  that  after  they  had 
dined  there  were  any  of  the  cooked  fish  remaining  ?  There  might  have 
been  some  bones  left  on  the  table ;  but  would  Christ  point  to  these 
fish  bones,  and  say,  Peter,  lovest  thou  more  than  these  ?  What  a  ques- 
tion for  Christ  to  ask  his  leading  disciple  !  Surely  such  an  inter- 
pretation is  absurd.  But  what  is  the  voice  of  antiquity  1  My  friend 
says  that  Justin  bears  him  out  in  his  interpretation.  Will  my  friend 
point  out  the  passage  in  Jhat  father's  works  ?  Will  he  say  that  it  is  the 
principal  sense,  the  sense  that  father  approves  1  I  pledge  myself  he  will 
not  pretend  to  do  so  while  refutation  is  near.  Now  if  scripture  is  so 
very  clear,  and  this  meaning  as  obvious  as  Mr.  C.  supposes,  is  it 
Qot  strange  that  this  light  should  beam  upon  us  to  day  for  the  first 
I  2 


102  DEBATE    ON    TUE 

time?  The  gentleman  charges  me  with  having  dared  to  change  the 
gender  of  the  word  signifying  these,  from  neuter  to  masculine.  Does 
he  not  know  that  the  word'  tii/t»»  is  both  masculine  and  neuter  1  It  is 
generally  applied  to  persons,  though  I  do  not  deny  that  it  may  be  ap- 
plied .to  things.  The  Greek  therefore  leaves  us  zs  much  in  the  daurk 
as  ever. 

We  find  a  parallel  passage  in  the  new  Testament.  "  He  that  loveth 
father  and  mother  more  than  me  is  not  worthy  of  me."  Matth.  x.  37. 
Here  the  words  are  J^rtg  t/xt  (more  than  me),  y/t  is  in  the  accusative 
case — TouTav  is  in  the  genitive  case.  But,  my  friends,  this  has  nothing 
to  do  with  the  question  at  issue ;  it  does  not  make  for  or  against  my 
argument,  whether  we  adopt  the  natural,  or  the  gross  interpretation. 
Christ  said  to  Peter,  "  lovest  thou  me.''''  He  demands  an  assurance  of 
his  faithful  attachment.  Peter  three  times  replies  in  the  affirmative, 
and  thrice  the  command  is  repeated  to  him,  "  feed  my  lambs,"  "  feed 
my  sheep."  The  argument  is  entirely  independent  of  either  con- 
struction referred  to.  Hence  I  maintain  that  Peter  was  established, 
head  of  the  church  by  Jesus  Christ.  The  "  rock,"  the  "  keys,"  the 
prayer,  the  prophecy  of  the  place  and  manner  of  Peter's  death,  which 
we  read  in  the  same  chapter,  all  prove  it. 

The  gentleman  says  that  a  doctrine  should  he  so  clear,  that  it  could 
not  possibly  be  contested.  This  is  really  too  soft  for  a  man  of  Mr. 
C.'s  strong  mind.  What  is  there  so  clear  that  it  could  not  possibly  be 
contested.  Does  not  the  universe  tell  as  clearly  as  Genesis,  that  God 
created  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  is  not  that  contested  1  Whal 
doctrine  more  clearly  revealed  in  the  bible,  or  more  important  than 
the  divinity  of  Christ  1  and  is  not  that  contested  ?  and  by  one  of  the 
most  learned  societies  of  christians  in  the  United  States,  I  mean  the 
Unitarians.  They  read  the  bible  and  they  think  it  impiety  and  bias 
phemy  to  call  Jesus  Christ  God  ! 

It  was  essential  in  the  Jewish  institution  that  there  should  be  a  high 
priest.  If  the  old  institution  was  a  type  of  the  new,  where  is  the 
anti-type  1  And  if  the  headship  of  the  high  priest  of  the  Jews  dero- 
gated not  from  the  authority  of  God  the  Father,  who  was  pleased  to 
be  their  special  ruler,  neither  does  the  headship  of  the  pope  derogate 
from  the  supreme  authority  of  God  the  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  who  acquir- 
ed the  church  by  his  blood  and  established  Peter  its  visible  head  on 
earth,  to  exercise  the  office  during  his  natural  life,  and  by  his  succes- 
sors for  ever. 

My  friend  flies  from  scripture  to  tradition,  and  from  a  father  of  the 
early  age  to  a  modern  historian.  I  will  pledge  myself  to  this  en- 
ightened  assembly  that  the  supremacy  of  Peter  and  of  Peter's  suc- 
cessors in  the  Roman  see  can  be  abundantly  attested  by  an  appeal  to 
tradition :  and  I  may  here  observe  that  Baronius  has  been  misrepre- 
sented. He  does  not  say  it  is  not  improbable  that  Peter  fixed  his  see  at 
Rome — of  this  he  knew  there  was  no  doubt ;  but  that  it  was  not  im- 
probable he  fixed  his  see  there  by  the  express  command  of  Christ, 
which  is,  the  intelligent  hearer  will  perceive,  quite  a  different  propo- 
sition. Peter  acted  as  the  other  apostles  did,  under  the  guidance  of  in- 
spiration, in  the  choice  of  the  scene  of  his  pastoral  toils;  but  Baronius 
thinks  it  not  improbable  that  Christ  expressly  commanded  him  to  se- 
lect Rome  for  his — ^There  he  could  "  teach  all  nations."  Mr.  C, 
asserts  that  for  a  thousand  years  there  is  not  a  voice  heard  to  attest 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  103 

this  fact.  My  friends,  not  one  voice,  but  five  hundred  attest  it.  There 
is  onf?  loud  chorus  of  testimony  among  the  fathers  and  historians, 
giving  almost  universal  consent  to  the  doctrine.  Some  obscure  indi- 
viduals may  have  doubted,  or  denied  it  in  late  years.  They  are  but 
motes  on  the  surface  of  the  overwhelming  stream  of  testimony.  Again 
my  friend  went  back  to  the  bible.  He  read  of  the  high  priest — but  he 
cannot  open  the  bible  without  seeing  his  own  refutation  written  there-^ 
almost  the  first  words  that  struck  my  ears  were,  the  dresses  and  anoint- 
ing of  the  priests.  Where  are  such  things  done  among  Protestants  1 
Do  they  not  make  void  the  scriptures  1  Anointing  the  clergy  and  the 
sick, — commanded  by  the  bible — rejected  by  Protestants — superseded 
by  the  fashions  of  the  day  !  AgaJh  :  Aaron  was  separated  that  he  should 
bless  and  sanctify — and  yet  if  the  pope  bless  or  sanctify,  he  is  an  im- 
pious assumer  of  what  belongs  to  God  alone !! 

The  case  of  Korah,  Dathan  and  Abiram  was  mentioned.  God  re- 
ally appears  to  me  to  extort  from  the  adversaries  of  his  church  the 
most  striking  proof  of  her  authority,  vindicated  in  the  Type,  from 
the  sacrilegious  contradictions  of  the  schismatics  of  the  old  law. 
The  ground  opened  and  swallowed  them  up !  So  have  all  the  sects, 
that  in  the  early  ages  opposed  the  church,  perished.  The  grave  has 
hiSden  their  guilt  from  the  earth,  too  happy  if  they  bear  not  its  pen- 
alty in  the  world  that  expands  beyond  the  grave  !  Again  250  priests 
perished  for  opposing  the  ordinance  of  God !  the  ecclesiastical  guide 
he  had  appointed ! 

My  friend  asks,  if  the  headship  of  Peter  and  his  successors  were 
as  certainly  divine  as  the  high  priesthood  of  the  old  law,  would  it  not 
have  been  established  by  proof  as  plain?  Why,  he  emphatically  de- 
manded, cannot  the  Roman  pontiff,  like  Aaron,  shew  his  authority  by 
an  equally  convincing  miracle  1  My  friends,  I  take  the  gentleman  at 
his  word.  He  that  has^yes  to  see  let  him  see.  Has  not  God  wrought 
a  similar  miracle — I  will  fearlessly  say — a  far  more  splendid  miracle, 
to  attest  the  preeminence  of  the  see  of  Peter]  Has  not  the  night  of 
Mahommedanism  and  infidelity  thrown  its  sable  pall  over  the  once 
flourishing  churches  of  Africa  and  Asia?  Has  not  the  bright  light  of 
the  gospel  become  extinct  in  the  most  celebrated  of  the  sees  founded 
by  the  other  apostles — Crete,  Corinth,  Ephesus,  Antioch,  Alexandria, 
Philippi,  Jerusalem  1  Where  is  the  hymn  of  praise  to  Christ  inton- 
ed, the  voice  of  pure  confession  heard,  the  tabernacle  of  the  tes- 
timony seen  in  any_  of  these  famous  churches,  where  St.  Paul  had 
formed  such  a  multitude  of  adorers  in  spirit  and  in  truth  1  which  he 
risited  with  so  much  solicitude,  prayed  for  with  so  much  fervor,  and 
loved  with  so  much  tenderness.  Returning  to  visit  these  churches, 
not  on  the  following  day  as  Moses  did  the  rods  of  the  twelve  tribes 
but  after  eighteen  hundred  years,  we  see  that  the  rod  of  Aaron,  th 
church  formed  by  the  high  priest  appointed  by  .Tesus  Christ  in  th 
New,  Law,  has  budded  and  blossomed,  and  produced  fruit  of  which 
all  the  nations  have  participated,  while  the  churches  formed  by  the 
other  apostles  have  been  stricken  with  a  melancholy  sterility,  and 
have  utterly  withered  !  The  murmuring  of  the  children  of  Israel 
against  Moses  and  Aaron  ceased  when  they  beheld  the  prodigy  rela- 
ted in  the  book  of  Numbers ;  is  it  too  much  to  expect  that  we  will  be 
less  insensible  to  an  equally  authentic  declaration  in  favor  of  the 
church  and  pontiff,  the  special  objects  of  the  divine  protection  and 
care  ?  •  • 


104  DEBATE    ON    THE 

When  Pius,  VT,  died  at  Valence,  in  France,  it  was  said  that  qnicli 
lime  was  thrown  on  his  corpse,  that  no  vestige  of  it  might  remain,  and 
infidelity  boasted  that  Christianity  was  buried  in  the  same  grave  with 
its  pontiff.  But  a  successor  was  soon  beheld  to  ascend  into  the  chair 
of  Peter — alas  !  he  too,  is  doomed  to  suffer  contumely  for  the  name  of 
Jesus.  He  is  seized  with  violence,  by  a  ruthless  soldiery,  and  car- 
ried off  from  Rome,  an  exile  and  a  prisoner,  to  Fontainebleau.  The 
doom  of  his  persecutor  is  written  :  he  is  precipitated  from  the  giddy 
heights  of  his  ambition,  and  the  meek,  but  invincible  heir  of  Peter's 
sacred  power,  contrary  to  all  human  foresight,  is  reinstated  by  a  Pro- 
festant  government,  by  30,000  Protestant  bayonets,  in  the  peaceful  ex- 
ercise of  his  duties,  as  the  chief  pastor  of  the  Catholic  world.  Eng- 
land, with  all  thy  faults  I  love  thee  still.  You  are  Protestants,  but 
you  can  be  ju^t.  Rome,  changeless  amid  change,  Rome,  free  among 
the  dead,  unaffected  by  earthly  revolutions,  by  earthly  conquests  un- 
subdued, why  have  the  nations  raged,  and  the  people  devised  vain 
things  against  thee  ?  The  Lord  is  thy  protector  still.  He  hath  won- 
derfully sustained  thee,  amidst  all  the  vicissitudes  of  human  institu- 
tions. "  He  that  dwelleth  in  heaven,"  to  use  the  language  of  the 
Psalmist,  "  hath  laughed  at  them  that  stood  up  against  thfje,  and  the 
Lord  shall  deride  them."  My  friend  would  call  it  "  morbid''''  in  England, 
to  sympathise  with  the  Catholics,  as  he  has  called  your  generous  sym 
pathies  for  your  persecuted  fellow-citizens  ;  but  it  is  not  morbid,  it  is 
magnanimous,  it  is  just  to  confess  an  error,  to  abjure  an  unfounded 
prejudice,  and  to  side  with  the  wrongfully  oppressed. 

1  quoted  scripture  to  prove  that  Christ  was  the  corner  stone,  on 
which  the  whole  building  securely  rests — and  that  Peter  is  the  rock  of 
the  foundation,  deriving  whatever  strength  it  has  thus  exhibited  from 
Christ.  There  is  no  contradiction  in  this.  I  am  compelled  to  follow  the 
zigzag  course  of  my  friend.  The  reader  of  the  printed  controversy  will 
be  at  no  loss  to  bring  together  the  diverging  rays  of  evidence  and  to  find 
m}' answers  to  objections,  where  they  may  be,  apparently  out  of  place. 

There  is  no  distinction  of  persons  in  Syriac.  In  Greek  it  is  once 
viiTfoi,  and  again  w>T/t!t— -but  this  change  of  gender  is  merely  to 
avoid  a  repetition  of  the  same  word  in  the  same  sentence.  This  ia 
reason  sufficient,  to  account  for  the  difference.  I  give  my  friend  thanks 
for  proving  that  Peter  was  not  Satan.  It  is  the  correct  reading,  and 
therefore,  I  agree  with  his  interpretation  of  the  text;  when  Christ  saya 
to  Peter,  "get  thee  behind  me  Satan,"  that  is  you,  who  differ  from 
me  on  this  particular  subject.     This  text  has  been  much  abused. 

Again :  Peter  did  think,  that  he  loved  Jesus  more  than  the  rest,  and 
Christ  knew  that  he  did.  Do  you  remember,  my  friends,  the  scene 
which  took  place  shortly  before  the  Savior  suffered  ?  When  he  told  hia 
apostles,  with  a  holy  melancholy  on  his  sacred  heart,  that  one  of  them 
would  betray  him — that  the  shepherd  should  be  stricken,  and  the  sheep 
dispersed  1  Ah  !  is  there  not  something  in  the  noble  hearted  er^thusi- 
asm  of  Peter,  which  is  at  once  the  cause  of  his  offence  and  its  pallia- 
tion 1  "  Although  all  shall  be  scandalized  in  thee,  yet  not  1."  This 
proves  an  impulsiveness,  an  ardor,  and  a  strength  of  attachment  to  the 
person  of  Christ,  which  Peter,  too  confidently  it  may  be,  but  yet  sin- 
cerely, believed  to  be  greater  than  the  other  disciples  felt  for  their  di- 
vine master. 
.  J^sus  knew  this,  but  he  wvns  him  D6t  to  be  presumptuous.  "Amen, 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RBXfGION.  105' 

I  aay  to  thee,  to-day,  even  in  this  night,  before  the  cock  crow  twice, 
thou  shaltdeny  me  thrice,"  Mark  xiv.  30.  From  this,  and  other  texts, 
Peter's  ardor,  and  the  Savior's  knowledge  of  his  confidence  in  his  own 
steadfastness  are  perfectly  plain.     Why,  then,  deny  them  both  ] 

1  quoted  the  vulgate,  not  through  ignorance  of  Greek,  on  which  I 
have  shewn  as  mhch  knowledge  as  my  friend  ;  but  not  to  boast  of  a 
little  learning  on  the  words,  nxuct  roulm.  The  Greek,  the  Latin,  and  the 
English,  as  verbal  criticism  is  necessary  to  elucidate  the  meaning  of 
the  text,  are  by  a  singular  coincidence,  in  this  case,  equally  ambigu- 
ous.    How  can  an  unlettered  Protestant  understand  the  text  ? 

The  popes  do  not  claim  to  be  lords,  spiritual,  and  temporal.  But 
very  few  of  them  exercised  any  temporal  power  beyond  the  limits  of 
their  own  principality,  where  they  rule,  as  Gibbon  told  you,  by  the 
voice  of  a  free  people  whom  they  have  redeemed  from  slavery.  Their 
throne  is  established  in  the  affections  of  their  people,  who,  with  rea- 
son, prefer  their  pontifTs  mild  sway  to  kingly  usurpation — the  crosier, 
to  the  sceptre.   The  popes  have  never  taken  the  title  of  kings  of  Rome. 

I  can  shew  from  Waddington  and  Southey,  both  Protestant  histori- 
ans of  the  church,  that  through  centuries  of  darkness  and  doubt  and 
civil  commotion,  while  the  Turk  was  ravaging  the  southern  regions  of 
Europe  and  the  northern  hordes  were  pouring  down  in  swarms  from 
their  ice-bound  regions,  desolating  the  blooming  fields,  and  destroying 
all  that  was  useful  and  beautiful  of  the  works  of  civilization,  the  pope 
was  the  only  savior  of  Europe,  from  their  barbarian  ravages.  He 
gave  to  science  and  to  letters  the  only  refuge  which  could  then  have 
availed  them — the  refuge  of  an  altar — and  the  now  calumniated  fnonks 
who  reproduced  in  more  auspicious  times,  the  intellectual  ray.  They 
handed  us  the  works  of  the  sages,  and  heroes,  the  poets,  historians 
and  orators  of  Greece  and  Rome  across  the  isthmus  of  the  "  dark  ages" 
80  called.     They  preserved  for  us  a  better  gift — the  Bible. 

Benefits  conferred  by  the  church. — "  Yet  should  we  be  very  unjust  to  the  Roniaa 
Catholic  church,  if  we  should  allow  it  to  be  supposed,  that  she  opened  no  recep- 
tacles, for  the  nurture  of  true  excellence;  that  in  her  general  institutions,  espe- 
cially in  her  earlier  age,  she  has  overlooked  the  moral  necessities  of  man — the 
truth  is  far  otherwise.  We  have  repeatedly  observed,  how  commonly,  in  seasons 
of  barbarism,  religion  was  employed  in  supplying  the  defects  of  civil  government 
and  diffusing  consolation  and  security.  The  Truce  of  God  mitigated  the  fury 
of  private  warfare,  by  limiting  the  hours  of  "t^engeance,  and  interposing  a  space 
forthe  operationofjustice ana  humanity.  The  nanieof  the  church  was  associated 
with  peace;  and  it  was  a  prouder  position,  than  when  she  trampled  on  the  necki 
of  kings,  (what  she  never  did  by  the  bye  as  I  shall  prove.)  The  emancipation  of 
the  Serfs  was  another  cause,  equally  sacred,  in  which  her  exertions  were  re- 
peatedly employed.  In  her  interference  in  the  concerns  of  monarchsand  nations, 
«he  frequently  appeared  as  the  advocate  of  the  weak,and  the  adversary  of  arbi- 
trary power.  Even  the  much  abused  law  of  Asylum  served  through  a  long  pe- 
riod, as  a  check  on  baronial  oppression,  rather  than  an  encouragement  to  crime. 

The  duty  of  charity,  during  the  better  ages  of  the  church,  was  by  no  meant 
Deglected  by  the  secular  clergy,  while  it  was  the  practice  and  office  of  the  mo- 
nastic estal)lishments.  And  even  the  discipline,  »o  strictly  inculcated  by  the 
earlier  prelates,  however  arbitrary  in  its  exercise,  and  pernicious  in  its  abvae, 
was  not  unprofitable  in  arresting  the  first  steps,  and  restraining  the  earliest  dis- 
positions to  sin.  Confession  and  penance,  and  the  awful  censures  of  the  church, 
when  dispensed  with  discretion,  must  have  been  potent  instruments  forthe  im- 
provement of  uncivilized  society."  Waddington's  Church  Hist,  page  546,  New 
York  edit.  W.io. 

We  now  come  to  the  word  Kaxjoc  (cleros,)  which  the  gentleman 
say  means  lot  and  not  clergy.     Lot  does  mean  the  whole  people  of 


106  DEBATE    0>'    THE 

God — clergy  and  laity.  Now  if  the  apostle  could  not  lord  it  oyer  the 
whole  people,  he  could  not  lord  it  over  the  clergy.  The  pope  does  not  lord 
it  over  the  consciences  of  either  clergy  or  laity — he  helieves  as  they  do. 

The  apostles  sent  Peter  and  John  to  Samaria.  Peter  and  John 
prohably  offered  themselves  for  the  early  mission — Peter,  to  whom 
God  had  given  superior  power — and  John,  who  had  leaned  on  the  bo- 
som of  Jesus  at  supper — both  pre-eminent  apostles,  to  confirm  the  peo- 
ple of  Samaria. 

No  man  can  read  the  New  Testament  attentively  without  seeing',  at 
a'.raost  every  page,  the  evidence  of  Peter's  divinely  appointed  and  ac- 
knowledged primacy ;  or  the  history  of  the  church,  without  every 
where  discovering  the  primacy  of  his  successors.  Not  one  council 
has  been  received  that  the  pope  did  not  approve.  His  approbation  is 
in  the  last  resort,  the  only  certain  test  of  a  council's  orthodoxy. 

Peter  spoke  first  in  the  council  at  Jerusalem.  Peter  was  justly  re- 
primanded by  Paul.  The  very  fact  of  Paul  mentioning  his  boldness 
on  this  occasion,  confirms  the  fact  of  Peter's  supremacy.  So  did  Ire- 
naeus  remonstrate  with  pope  Victor  in  the  controversy  of  the  Quarto- 
decimans — about  the  time  of  observing  the  Easter — and  the  pope's 
sentiments  prevailed — although  Irenaeus'  dissuasive  did  good.  So  did 
the  controversy  about  re-baptization  terminate  between  St.  Cyprian 
and  the  popes  Cornelius  and  Stephen.  The  popes'  decision  was  every 
where  received. 

Now  Paul  himself  did  the  same  for  which  he  blamed  Peter.  He 
knew  and  prized  the  freedom  with  which  Christ  had  made  him  free, 
yet  he  says,  "  If  meat  scandalize  my  brother,  I  will  not  eat  ii  forever." 

He  vainly  persists  in  saying  there  is  no  good  ground  for  asserting  that 
Peter  was  ever  in  Rome,  after  all  the  proof  I  have  adduced.  Here  is 
Robinson's  Calmet,  a  Protestant  dictionary  of  the  Bible,  a  standard  work 
in  Protestant  libraries.  Calmet  was  a  Roman  Catholic.  He  was  a  prodigy 
of  learning  and  ancient  literature — and  Robinson,  a  Protestant  divine, 
thought  he  could  not  furnish  a  better  gift  to  the  public  than  this  book. 

"  \i  the  reader  wishes  to  see  the  evidence  from  antiquity,  on  which  Peter's 
having  been  at  Rome  rests,  he  will  find  it  fully  set  forth  b}'  Lardner,  who  con- 
cludes his  inquiry  as  follows  :  This  is  the  general,  uncontradicted,  disinterest- 
ed testimony  of  ancient  writers  in  the  several  parts  of  the  world,  Greeks,  Lat- 
ins, Syrians.  As  our  Lord's  prediction  concerning  the  death  of  Peter,  is  record- 
ed in  one  of  the  four  Gospels,  it  is  very  likely  that  christians  would  observe  the 
accomplishment  of  it,  which  must  have  been  in  some  place.  And  about  thii 
place,  there  is  no  difference  among  christian  writers  of  ancient  times.  Never 
any  other  place  was  named  besides  Rome ;  nor  did  any  other  city,  ever  glory  in 
the  martyrdom  of  Peter.  It  is  not  for  our  honor,  nor  for  our  interests,  either 
Bs  christians  or  Protestants,  to  deny  the  truth  of  events  ascertained  by  early  and 
well  attested  tradition.  If  any  make  an  ill  use  (as  he  calls  it)  of  such  facts,  we 
are  not  accountable  for  it.  We  are  not,  from  a  dread  of  such  abuses,  to  over- 
throw the  credit  of  all  history,  the  consequence  of  which  would  be  fatal."  Rob- 
inson's Calmet,  p.  741. 

The  gentleman  has  said  that  not  one  voice  has  attested  the  fact  of 
the  succession  of  the  Roman  see  for  a  thousand  years.  I  have  quoted 
Eusebius,  a  Greek  father  of  the  fourth  century,  translated  by  a  Pro- 
testant minister,  a  splendid  work.  Here  is  a  list  of  29  bishops  who 
sat  in  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  all  of  whom  he  names  in  the  body  of  the 
work;  also  the  succession  in  the  churches  of  Jerusalem,  Antioch, 
Rome,  Laodicea,  &,c.    ■ 

Of  St.  Peter. 

(Simon  Magus)  "entering-  the  city  of  Rome,  by  the  co-operation  of  that  ma 


BOMAN   CATHOLIC    KEtlGION.  107 

lig^nant  spirit  which  had  fixed  its  seat  there,  his  attempts  were  soon  so  far  sue* 
veasful,  as  to  be  honored  as  a  g'od,  with  the  erection  of  a  statue  b^  the  inhabitant!) 
of  that  citj-.  This,  however,. did  not  continue  long;  for  immediately  under  the 
reisfn  of  Claudius,  by  the  benign  and  graciouB  providence  of  God,  Peter,  that 
poueiful  and  great  apostle,  who.,  by  his  courage  took  the  lead  of  all  the  rest,  was 
conditcted  to  Rome  against  this  pest  of  mankind.  He,  like  a  noble  ooinniand^r 
of  God,  fortified  with  divine  armor,  bore  the  precious  merchandise  of  the  re- 
vealed light  from  the  East  to  those  in  the  West,  announcing  the  light  itself, 
and  salutary  docrine  of  the  soul,  the  proclamatioa  of  the  kingdom  ot  God." — 
Cook  11.  chap.  14,  page  64. 

Of  Linus. 

"After  the  martyrdom  of  Paul  and  Peter,  Liaus  was  the  first  that  received  the 
epijcopate  at  Rome." — Book  III.  chap.  2,  page  82. 
Anaclktus. 

"After  Vespasian  had  reigned  about  ten  years,  he  was  succA'ded  by  his  son 
Titus;  in  the  second  year  of  whose  reign,  Linus,  bishop  of  the  church  of  Rome, 
who  had  held  the  oihce  about  twelve  years,  transferrecl  it  to  Anacletus." — Chap. 
13,  page  100, 

Clement. 

"  In  the  twelfth  year  of  the  game  reig^  (Domitian's,)  after  Anacletus  had 
been  bishop  of  Rome  twelve  years,  he  was  succeeded  by  Clement."  — Chap.  15, 
page  100. 

EUARESTUS. 

■"  In  the  third  year  of  the  above  mentioned  reign  (Trajan's,)  Clement,  bishop 
of  Rome,  committed  the  episcopal  charge  to  Euarestus." — Chap.  34,  page  120. 
Alexander. 

■"  About  the  twelfth  year  of  the  reign  of  Trajan, after  Euarestus  had 

completed  the  eighth  year  as  bishop  of  Rome,  he  was  succeeded  in  the  episcopal 
office  by  Alexander." — B«ok  IV.  chap.  1,  page  128. 

XVSTUS. 

"  But  in  the  year  of  the  same  (Adrian's)  reign,  Alexander,  bishop  of  Rome, 
died,  having  completed  the  tenth  year  of  his  ministrations.  Xystus  was  his  suc- 
cessor."— Chap.  4,  page  130. 

Telesphorus  and  Hyginus. 

"  In  the  first  year  of  this  (Antonine's)  reign,  and  in  the  eleventh  year  of  his 
episcopate,  Telesphorus  departed  this  life,  and  was  succeeded  in  the  charge  of 
the  Roman  -church  by  Hyginus." — Chap.  10,  page  137. 

Pius. 
"  But  Hyginus  dying  after  the  fourth  j-ear  of  his  office,  Pius  received  the 
episcopate." — Chap.  11,  page  138. 

Anicetus. 
"And  Pius  dyin^  at  Rome  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  his  episcopate,  the  church 
there  was  governed  by  Aaicetus." — Ibid,  page  138. 

SoTER. 
"  It  was  in  the  eighth  year  of  the  above   mentioned  reign,  vii.  that  of  Verua 
that  Anicetus,  who  held  the  episcopate  of  Rome  for  eleven  years,  was  succeedei. 
by  Soter." — Chap.  19,  page  156. 

Eleutherus.  ' 

"  Soter,  bishop  of  Rome,  died  after  having  held  the  episcopate  eight  years.  He 
was  succeeded  by  Eleutherus,  the  twelfth  in  order  from  the  apostles." — Book  V. 
Prelim,  page  168. 

Victor. 
"  In  the  tenth  year  of  the  reign  of  Commodus,  Eleutherus,  who  had  held  the 
episcopate  for  thirteen  years,  was  succeeded  by  Victor." — Chap.  22,  page  206. 
Zephyrinus. 
"  But  after  this  author  (Victor,)  had  superintended  the  church,  Zephyrinus  was 
appointed  his  successor  about  the  ninth  year  of  the  reign  of  Severus." — Chap 
28,  page  214. 

Calijsthus  and  Urbanus. 
"  In  the  first  year  of  the  latter  (Antonine's  reign,)  Zephyrinus  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  departed  this  life,  after  having  charge  of  the  church  eighteen  years.     He 
was  succeeded  in  the  episcopate  by  Callisthus,  who  survived  him  five  years,  and 
y-A  the  church  to  Urbanus. — Chap.  21,  page  242. 


109  DEBATE    ON    THE 

PONTIAT^US. 

"  Whilst  this  was  the  state  of  things,  Urban,  who  had  been  bishop  of  Rome 
eight  years,  was  succeeded  by  Pontianus." — Chap.  23,  page  243. 
Anteros  and  Fabiajjus. 

"  Gordian  succeeded  Maximus  in  the  sovereignty  of  Rome,  when  Pontianus 
who  had  held  the  episcopate  six  years,  was  succeeded  by  Anteros  in  the  chuzch 
of  Rome;  he  also  is  succeeded  by  Fabianus." — Chap.  29,  page  248. 

CORNEUUS. 

"  Decius  ....  raised  a  persecution  against  the  church,  in  which  Fabja/sM 
■ufTered  martyrdom,  and  was  succeeded  as  bishop  of  Rome  by  Cornelius." — 
Chap.  39,  page  254. 

Lucius  AND  Stephen. 

"After  Cornelius  had  held  the  episcopal  office  at  Rome  about  three  yetrs,  he 
was  succeeded  by  Lucius,  but  the  latter  did  not  hold  the  office  quite  eight 
months,  when  flying  he  transferred  it  to  Stephen." — Book  VIL  chap.  2,  page 

Stephen  and  Xystus  IL 
"  But  after  Stephen  had  held  the  episcopal  office  two  years,  he  was  succeeded 
by  Xystus." — Chap.  5,  page  273. 

DlONYSIUS. 

"  Xystus  had  been  bishop  of  Rome  eleven  years,  when  he  was  succeeded  by 
Dionysius."^^hap.  27,  page  302. 

Fetjx. 

"  Dionvsius,  who  had  been  bishop  of  Rome  for  nine  years,  was  succeeded  by 
Felix."— ^hap.  30,  page  308. 

EUTYCHIANTJS,   CAIUS,  AND   MARCELLINUS. 

"  At  this  time  Felix,  having  held  the  episcopate  at  Rome  five  years,  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Eutychianus,  and  he  did  not  hold  the  office  quite  ten  months,  when  he 
left  his  place  to  be  occupied  by  Caius  of  our  own  dSy.  Caius,  also,  presided 
about  fifteen  years,  when  he  was  succeeded  by  Marcellinus." — Chap.  32,  page  310 

MlLTlADES. 

"  Constantine  Augustus,  to  Miltiades  bishop  of  Rome." — Book  X.  chap.  Ft 
page  429. 

I  need  only  refer  to  what  I  have  read  from  this  authentic  historian 
for  splendid  and  indisputable  proof.  Here  is  the  succession  equally 
plain  in  all  the  churches,  but  longest  in  Borne.  Thence  it  has  been 
faithfully  noticed,  and  regularly  perpetuated  in  an  uninterrupted  chain 
of  pontiffs  down  to  the  present  chief  pastor,  'auspiciously  presiding 
over  all  the  church. 

Now,  my  friend,  in  the  name  of  God  what  is  to  become  of  this  con- 
troversy, when  testimony  like  this  is  overlooked?  And  to  close  the 
testhnony  of  Eusebius  who  has  embodied  that  of  the  preceding  ages, 
so  as  to  leave  no  doubt,  that  the  same  identical  doctrines,  the  present 
organization,  orders  and  sacraments  of  the  Catholic  church  were  those 
of  the  fi/st  ages  of  Christianity,  and  heresy  too  the  same  then  that  it  now 
is.  I  crave  your  attention  for  one  of  the  most  instructive  chapters 
thai  could  possibly  be  read  on  a  subject  of  .such  absorbing  interest  to 
the  Christian. 

O/*  JVovatus,  his  manners  and  habits,  and  his  heresy. 

About  this  time  appeared  JVovatus  (Novatian)  a  presbyter  of  the  church  of 
Rome,  and  a  man  elevated  with  haughtiness  against  these  (that  had  fallen),  as  if 
there  was  no  room  for  them  to  hope  salvation,  not  even,  if  they  performed  every 
thing  for  a  genuine  and  pure  confession.  He  thus  became  the  leader  of  the  pe- 
culiar heresy  of  those  who,  in  the  pomp  of  their  imaginations,  called  themselves 
Cathail.  A  very  large  council  being  held  on  account  of  this,  at  which  sixty  in- 
deed of  the  bishops,  but  a  still  greater  number  of  presbyters  and  deacons  were 
present  ;  the  pastors  of  the  remaining  provinces,  accordmg  to  their  places,  deli- 
beratetl  separately  what  should  be  done:  this  decree  was  passed  by  all;  "That 
Novatus,  indeed,  and  those  who  so  arrogantly  united  with  him,  and  those  that 
had  determined  to  adopt  the  uncharitable  ai  d  most  inhuman  opinion  of  the  man. 


ROMAK    CATHOLIC    KELIGIOW.  109 

{hc»e  they  considered  among'  those  that  were  alienated  from  tb»  vkoicb;  but 
that  brethren  who  had  incurred  any  calamity,  ibould  be  treateJ  ittM,  >«wled  witii 
the  remedies  of  repentance." 

There  are  also  epistles  of  Cornelius,  bishop  of  Rome,  addressed  to  Fabius,  bi- 
shop of  Antioch,  which  show  the  transactions  of  the  council  of  Rome,  as  also, 
the  opinions  of  all  those  in  Italy  and  Africa,  and  the  regions  there.  Others  there 
are  also  written  in  the  Roman  tongue,  from  Cyprian,  and  the  bishops  with  him  in 
Atrica.  In  these,  it  is  shewn  that  they  also  agree  in  the  necessity  of  relieving 
those  who  had  fallen  under  severe  temptations,  and  also  in  the  propriety  of  ex- 
communicating the  author  of  the  heresy,  and  all  that  were  oi  his  party.  To 
these  is  attached  also  an  epistle  from  Cornelius  on  the  decrees  of  the  council, 
bfsides  others  on  the  deeds  of  Novatus,  from  which  we  may  add  extracts,  that 
those  who  read  the  present  work  may  know  the  circumstances  respecting  him. 
What  kind  of  a  character  Novatus  was,  Cornelius  informs  Fabius,  writing  as  fol- 
lows: "  But  that  you  may  know,  says  he,  how  this  singular  nian,'who  formerly 
aspired  to  the  episcopate,  and  secretly  concealed  within  himself  this  precipitate 
ambition,  making  use  of  those  confessors  that  adhered  to  him  from  the  beginning 
as  a  cloak  for  his  own  folly,  I  will  proceed  to  relate:  Maximus,  u  presbyter  of 
our  church,  and  Urbanus,  twice  obtained  the  highest  reputation  for  their  con- 
fessions. Sidonius  also,  and  Celerinus,  a  man  who,  by  the  mercy  of  God,  bore 
every  kind  of  torture  in  the  most  heroic  manner,  and,  by  the  firnmess  of  his  own 
faith  strengthened  the  weakness  of  the  flesh,  completely  worsted  the  adversaiy. 
These  men,  therefore,  as  they  knew  him,  and  had  well  sounded  his  artifice  and 
duplicity,  as  also  his  penuries  and  falsehoods,  his  dissocial  and  savage  character, 
returned  to  the  holy  church,  and  aimounced  all  his  devices  and  wickedness,  which 
he  had  for  a  long  time  dissembled  within  himself,  and  this  too  in  the  presence  of 
many  bishops;  and  the  same  also,  in  the  presence  of  many  presbyters,  and  a 
great  number  of  laymen,  at  the  same  time  lamenting  and  sorrowing  that  they 
had  been  seduced,  and  had  abandoned  the  church  for  a  short  time,  through  the 
agency  of  that  artful  and  malicious  beast."  After  a  little,  he  further  says:  We 
have  seen,  beloved  brother,  within  a  short  time,  an  extraordinary  conversion  and 
change  in  him.  Forthismost  illustrious  man,  and  he  who  affirmed  with  the  most 
dreadful  oaths,  that  he  never  aspired  to  the  episcopate,  has  suddenly  appeared  a 
bishop,  as  thrown  among  us  by  some  machine.  For  this  dogmatist,  this  (pre- 
tended) champion  of  e-cclesiastical  discipline,  when  he  attempted  to  geize  and 
usurp  the  episcopate  not  given  him  from  above,  selected  two  desperate  characteri 
as  his  associates,  to  send  them  to  some  small,  and  that  the  smallest,  part  of  Italy, 
and  from  thence,  by  some  fictitious  plea,  to  impose  upon  three  bishops  there,  men 
altogether  ignorant  and  simple,  aflirming  and  declaring,  that  it  was  necessary  foi 
them  to  come  to  Rome  in  all  haste,  that  all  the  dissension  which  had  there  aris- 
en might  be  removed  through  their  mediation,  in  conjunction  with  the  other  bi- 
shops. When  these  men  had  come,  being  as  before  observed,  but  simple  and 
plain  in  discerning  the  artifices  and  villany  of  the  wicked,  and  when  shut  up 
with  men  of  the  same  stamp  with  himself,  at  the  tenth  hour,  when  heated  with 
wine  and  surfeiting,  they  forced  them  by  a  kind  of  shadowy  and  empty  imposi- 
tion of  hands,  to  confer  the  episcopate  upon  him,  and  which,  though  by  no  meant 
suited  to  him,  he  claims  by  fraud  and  treacherj-.  One  of  these,  not  long  after,  re- 
turned to  his  church,  mourning  and  confessing  his  error,  with  whom  also  we  com- 
muned as  a  layman, as  all  the  people  present  interceded  for  him,  and  we  sent  suc- 
cessors to  the  other  bishops,  ordaining  them  in  the  place  where  they  were.  This 
asserterot  the  gospel  then  did  not  know  that  there  should  be  but  one  bish(fp  in 
a  catholic  church.*   ('i-  xstSoXixn  ixxx-iio-ia). 

•  The  word  catholic,  in  its  Greek  etymology,  means  universal,  as  we  have  sometimes  ex- 
plained it  in  this  translation.  It  is  applied  to  the  Christian,  as  a  universal  church,  partly 
to  ilittinguish  it  from  the  ancient  church  of  the  Jews,  which  was  limited,  partial,  and  paF 
ticniar  in  its  duration,  subjects  and  country.  The  Christian  is  also  called  a  universal  or 
eatholic  church,  because  it  must  in  regard  to  doctrine  hold  quod  sempe~.  quod  ubique,  quod 
Mi  omnibrts.  In  this  latter  view,  which  it  should  be  well  observed  is  the  original  applica- 
tion, it  is  «:ynonymous  with  orthodox.  This  is  evident,  from  the  fact  that  our  author  appliea 
it  to  different  churches  in  other  parts  of  his  history.  And  in  the  present  instance  the  ex- 
pression is  general,  a  eatholic  church.  It  is  in  a  sense  allied  to  this  also,  that  we  are,  no 
doubt,  to  understand  the  title  of  our  general,  (catholic)  epistles,  in  the  New  Testament. 
They  are  catholic,  because  as  consonant  to  the  doctrines  of  the  church  in  all  respects,  thef 
have  been  also  universally  received.  In  this  Sttnse,  the  term  is  also  lyuoaym'tus  with  can 
*»'eal 


110  DEBATE    Oy   THE 

In  which,  however,  he  well  knew,  (for  how  could  he  be  ignorant  ?)  that  thera 
were  forty-six  presb,  ters,  seven  deacons,  seven  sub-deacons,  forty-two  acoluthi 
(clerks,)  exorcists,  re'.ders,  and  janitors,  in  all  fifty -two ;  widows,  with  the  afflicted 
and  needy,  more  than  fifteen-hundred;  all  which  the  goodness  and  love  of  God 
doth  support  and  nourish.  But  neither  this  great  number,  so  necessary  in  the 
church,  nor  those  that  by  the  providence  of  God  were  wealthy  and  opulent,  toge- 
ther with  the  innumerable  multitude  of  the  people,  were  able  to  recall  him  and 
turn  him  from  such  a  desperate  and  presumptuous  course."  And  again,  after  these, 
he  subjoins  the  following:  *'  Now  let  us  also  tell  by  what  means  and  conduct  h« 
aad  tlie  assurance  to  claim  the  episcopate.  Whether,  indeed,  it  was  because  he 
ivas  engaged  in  the  church  from  the  beginning,  and  endured  many  conflicts  for  her, 
»nd  encountered  many  and  great  dangers  in  the  cs-.ase  of  true  religion?  None  of  all 
tbU.  To  him,  indeed,  the  authorand  instigator  o'' his  faith  was  Satan,  who  enter- 
ed into  and  dwelt  in  him  a  long  time.  Who,  a''l<id  by  the  exorcists,  when  attacked 
with  an  obstinate  disease,  and  being  supposed  ut  the  point  of  death,  was  baptised 
ay  aspersion,  in  the  bed  on  which  he  iay ;  if,  indeed,  it  be  proper  to  say  that  one  like 
»mi  did  receive  baptism.  But  neithri'  when  he  recovered  from  disease,  did  he  par- 
take of  other  things,  vh'ch  the  rules  of  the  church  prescribed  as  a  duty,  nor  was  he 
.euled  (in  conflrmatiofl)by  the  bishop.  Butashe  ciid  not  obtain  this,  l:ovv  could  ha 
>btain  the  Holy  Spirit'.'"  And  again, soon  after,  he  says:  "  He  denied  he  was  a_ 
Diesbyter,  through  covrar'jice  and  the  love  of  life,  in  the  time  of  persecution.  For 
when  requested  and  oxborled  by  the  deacons,  that  he  should  go  forth  from  his  re- 
reat,  in  which  he  had  imprisoned  himself,  and  should  come  to  the  relief  of  the  bre- 
thren, as  far  as  was  proper  and  in  the  power  ofa  presbyter  to  assist  brethren  requir- 
ing relief,  he  was  so  far  from  yielding  to  any  exhortation  of  the  deacons,  that  he 
went  away  oflended  and  left  them.  For  he  said  that  he  wished  to  be  a  presbyter  no 
•onger,  for  he  was  an  admirer  of  a  different  philosophy."  After  this,  he  addj 
.another  deed,  the  worst  of  all  the  man's  absurdities,  thus  :  "  For  having  made 
he  oblation,  and  distributed  a  part  to  each  one,  whilst  givingthis,  he  compels  the 
anhappy  men  to  swear  instead  of  blessing  ;  holding  the  hands  of  the  one  receiv 
ng,  with  both  his  own,  and  not  letting  them  go  until  he  had  sworn  in  these  words, 
'or  I  shall  repeat  the  very  words:  'Swear  to  me,  by  the  body  and  blood  of  our 
■  savior,  Jesus  Christ,  that  you  will  never  desert  me,  nor  turn  to  Cornelius.' 
^nd  the  unhappy  man  is  then  not  suft'ered  to  taste  until  he  had  first  cursed  him 
lelf ;  and  instead  of  saying  Amen,  after  he  had  taken  the  bread,  he  says,  'I  will 
«o  longer  return  to  Cornelius."  And,  after  other  matters,  he  again  proceeds,  ag 
follows  :  "  Now, you  must  know,  that  he  is  stripped  and  abandoned,  the  brethren 
leaving  him  every  day  and  returning  to  the  church.  He  was  also  excommunicat- 
ed by  Moses,  that  blessed  witness,  who  but  lately  endured  a  glorious  and  wonder- 
ful martyrdom,  and  who,  whilst  yet  among  the  living,  seeing  the  audacity  and 
the  folly  of  the  man,  excluded  him  from  the  communion,  together  with  the 
five  presbyters  that  had  cut  themselves  off  from  the  church."  At  the  close  of  the 
epistle,  he  gives  a  list  of  the  bishops  who  had  come  to  Rome,  and  had  discarded 
the  incorrigible  disposition  of  Novatus;  at  the  same  time  adding  the  names,  to- 
gether with  the  churches  governed  by  each.  He  also  mentioned  those  that  were 
iiot  present  at  Rome,  but  who,  by  letter,  assented  to  the  decision  of  the  former, 
adding  also  the  names  and  the  particular  cities  whence  each  one  had  written. 
Such  is  the  account  written  by  Cornelius  to  Fabius  bishop  of  Antioch. — From 
pages  263-4-5-6-7  of  Eusebius' Eccles.  Hist,  transl.  by  Rev.  C.  F.  Crus^.  Book 
vi.  <^ap.  43. — [Time  expired.] 

Half  past  \\,A.  M. 
Mr.  Campbeli,  rises — 

1  have  some  respect,  my  friends,  not  only  to  the  audience  who  hear 
but  to  those  who  may.  read  this  discussion;  and,  therefore,  I  wish  my 
argument  to  be  as  continuous  and  unbroken  as  possible.  I  could,  indeed, 
wish  that  my  ingenious  and  eloquent  opponent  would  reply  to  my 
speeches  in  regular  sequence,  and  thus  give  more  of  system  and  tenacity 
to  our  debate.  Before  I  trace  his  zigzag  course,  I  wish  to  add  to  my  last 
speech  a  few  k'.ndred  considerations.  While  it  behooves  him  to  prove 
that  Peter  was  first  bishop  of  Rome,  I  am  gratuitously  in  display  of  my 
resources,  as  the  advocate  of  Protestantism,  rather  spontaneously  prov- 


EOMAN    CATHOLIC    HELIGION  111 

ing  a  negative,  or  showing  that  Peter  never  was  bishop  of  Rome.  Two 
considerations  may  be  added  to  my  remarks  on  this  head:  1st.  The 
special  commission,  which  he  had  to  the  Jews  as  Paul  had  to  the 
Gentiles,  precludes  the  idea  of  his  here  devoting  himself  to  any  por- 
tion of  the  Oentile  world.  The  "ministry  of  the  circumcision"  was 
committed  to  him,  and  therefore  not  the  Roman  capital;  but  rather  the 
Syrian  capital  or  Jerusalem  should  have  been  the  place  of  his  location. 
2d.  His  commission,  as  apostle,  precludes  the  idea  of  his  being  sta- 
tioned as  bishop  at  any  one  place.  You  cannot  place  Peter  as  bishop 
of  Rome,  any  more  than  you  can  make  the  president  of  the  United 
States  mayor  of  Cincinnati.  The  duties  of  these  officers  are  not  more 
incompatible  than  the  duties  of  an  apostle  and  a  resident  bishop.  What 
are  the  duties  of  the  bishop's  chair  1  Are  they  not  to  watch  over  a 
particular  diocese?  What  does  the  apostles'  commission  say]  "Go 
ye  into  all  the  world,  and  announce  the  glad  tidings  to  the  whole  crea- 
tion." It  would  be  as  easy  to  prove  that  the  bishop  of  London  may 
be  vicar  of  Bray,  or  curate  of  St.  Ives,  as  that  Peter  was,  or  could  be, 
bishop  of  Rome.  These  two  considerations  deserve  the  attention  of 
my  friend,  and  I  hope  that  he  will  not  pass  them  too  in  silence. 

That  every  important  office,  essential  to  the  government  of  any  com- 
munity, must  have  a  place  clearly  specific  in  the  constitution  is  scarce 
ly  necessary  to  prove ;  yet,  as  my  opponent  seems  to  slur  over  this 
matter,  I  shall  read  a  sentence  or  two  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  to  show  that  in  the  estimation  of  its  framers,  it  was  necessary 
to  have  a  distinct  assertion  of  the  office  and  power  of  the  president. 

Art.  II.  Sect.  1.  The  executive  power  shall  be  vested  in  a  President  of  the 
United  Stateii  of  America.  He  shall  hold  his  office  during  the  term  of  foui 
years,  and,  together  with  the  Vice  President,  chosen  for  the  same  term  as  fol- 
lows : 

Sect.  2.  "  Each  state  shall  appoint,in  such  manner  as  the  legislature  there- 
of may  direct,  a  number  of  electors,  equal  to  the  whole  number  of  senatorsand 
representatives  to  which  the  state  may  be  entitled  in  the  congress;  but  no  senator 
or  representative,  or  person  holding  any  office  of  trust  or  profit  under  the  Unit- 
ed States,  shall  be  appointed  an  elector."     The  American's  Guide, p.  20. 

Now  the  head  of  the  christian  church  was,  at  least,  as  wise  as  the 
convention  which  framed  this. instrument,  foreseeing  all  the  difficulties 
of  the  church  in  all  time,  and  as  he  was  determined  to  make  all  things 
plain,  and  certainly  he  was  as  capable  as  they  to  reveal  and  express 
his  own  will,  had  he  resolved  to  build  his  church  on  the  shoulder  of 
St.  Peter,  he  would  have  unequivocally  expressed  it.  He  would  have 
defined  the  office,  appointed  the  first  officer,  and  legislated  the  mode 
of  election.  The  practice  of  electing  popes  in  the  church  of  Rome  is 
a  candid  acknowledgment  that  there  is  no  law  in  the  case:  for  they 
have  had  very  diflferent  modes  at  different  periods  of  their  history. 
What  would  we  Americans  say,  if  every  few  years  a  new  mode  should 
be  adopted,  without  regard  to  the  constitution?  Would  they  submit 
to  such  a  chief  magistrate? 

The  gentleman  proceeded  to  read  and  reiterate  his  remarks  en  two 
passages  of  scripture,  often  before  us :  he  objects  to  my  criticism  on 
the  last  chapter  of  John.  His  last  remarks  enable  me  to  give  it  a 
more  thorough  exposition.  He  says  my  construction  "requires  the 
accusative  for  these."  I  say,  with  more  of  the  philosophy  of  language, 
his  construction  requires  the  nominative.  The  question  would  have 
been  plainly  this  :  "  Do  you  love  me  more  than  these  love  me."  UKuZr, 
it  is  true,  always  requires  the  genitive ;  but  the  whole  construction  of 


ll5i  DEBATE    ON    THE 

ihe  sentence  would  have  been  changed,  if  these  were  to  he  the  noinina* 
live  to  the  verb  here  understood.  My  construction  is  critically  correct 
as  the  sentence  now  reads,  but  it  will  not  bear  his  construction.  But 
there  is  yet  another  great  assumption  in  the  quotation  of  this  passage 
on  which  I  have  not  yet  emphasized.  He  says,  "/eerf  my  sheep'''  means, 
feed  my  pastors,  and  '•'■feed  my  lambs''^  means,  feed  my  Jiock.  Mark  the 
assuinpfion,  that  sheep  signifies  pastors,  and  lambs  the  people!  Where 
does  he  find  authority  for  this?  If  '■'■  sheej)'''  any  where  else  signified 
^'' clergy, ^^  and  "lambs"  laity,  there  would  be  some  plausibility  in  it; 
but  with  the  absence  of  such  usage  it  is  supremely  whimsical  and 
arbitrary ;  and  yet  the  point  of  this  passage  rests  upon  the  assumption 
of  sheep  for  clergy.  So  far  he  presses  it  into  his  service,  for  that 
hishnjis  are  to  feed  the  flock  is  not  disputed,  but  that  one  of  them  is 
before  the  others  is  the  question  in  debate. 

The  gentleman,  on  Saturday,  called  my  interpretation  of  this  pas- 
sage a  fish  story ;  this  mode  of  treating  so  holy  an  institution,  so 
solemn  a  matter,  is  not  in  the  true  dignity  of  the  subject,  nor  of  the 
occasion  ;  nor  is  it  very  respectful  to  the  great  personage  on  whose 
words  we  comment;  but  the  audience  have  not  met  it  with  a  laugh,  and 
therefore  I  presume  they  felt  the  incongruity.  In  the  same  style  are 
the  morning's  remarks  on  the  hones,  &c.  but  the  bishop  might  remem- 
ber there  was  more  in  the  premises  than  the  spoils  of  a  single  meal ; 
there  were  many  fish  and  all  the  apparatus  before  them,  but  no  one 
would  interpret  the  words  of  the  question  in  that  style  on  any  othei 
occasion.  It  was  sustenance  in  general,  and  not  a  particular  meal, 
concerning  which  the  Savior  spoke. 

The  gentleman  suggests  that,  in  the  1st  chap,  of  John,  Christ  in  his 
first  interview  with  Peter  changes  his  name  to  Cephas ;  and  he  as- 
sumes "that  it  was  that  he  might  afterwards  make  him  the  rock  of 
his  church  !"  It  was  a  vAy  common  thing  in  the  history  of  the  patri- 
archs and  Jews  to  change  names.  Thus  we  find  from  the  beginning 
of  their  history,  various  instances  of  this  :  "  Sarai"  is  changed  into 
Sarah;  "  Abram"  into  Abraham,-,  "Jacob"  into  Israel.  Two  of  the 
apostles  were  called  "Boanerges"  sons  of  Thunder;  but  that  did  not 
convert  them  into  thunder;  neither  did  the  name  Cephas  convert  Peter 
into  a  stone.  If  I  were  to  give  a  reason  for  the  addition  to  Peter's 
name,  (but  it  was  neither  change  nor  addition,  rightly  considered,)  I 
would  say  that  it  was  most  probably  occasioned  by. Che  fact,  that  Daniel 
spoke  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah  under  the  figure  of  a  stone,  cut 
out  of  the  mountain.  With  an  eye  probably  to  this  kingdom  of  the 
stone,  (as  Peter  was  the  first  convert,)  his  name  is  improved  by  being 
translated  into  Syriac ;  for  after  all,  it  is  rather  a  translation  of  Peiroa 
than  an  addition  to  it!  He  was,  however,  the  beginning  of  this  new 
epiritual  edifice,  and  a  foundation  stone ;  but  only  one  among  many. 

This  kingdom  of  the  stone,  it  is  foretold  by  Daniel,  was  to  com- 
mence in  the  days  of  the  Cesars :  but  it  was  to  become  the  kingdom 
of  the  mountain.  It  was,  indeed,  to  become  a  great  mountain,  and  fill 
Jhe  whole  earth.  This  building  is  composed  of  a  succession  of  foun- 
dations, provided  only  that  all  the  popes  are  successors  of  Peter,  in 
virtue  of  his  being  the  rock.  To  have  this  whole  building  at  the 
foundation,  or  to  be  always  laying  new  foundations  in  every  election 
of  a  pope  is  rather  a  singular  idea,  which  grows  out  of  the  extravagance 
of  the  Romish  assumption. 


HOMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGIOW,  113 

TTie  bishop  observes  that  a  headless  trunk  is  worth  nothing,  and 
would  seem  to  think  that  our  argunnent  on  that  subject  leaves  th« 
church  without  a  head.  Has  the  church  no  other  head  than  the  popel 
Of  whatever  church  the  pope  is  head,  that  church  is  the  body  of  the 
pope:  And  is  it  Christ's  body  too?  .The  Romanists  are  the  body  of 
the  bishop's  church — cut  the  head  off  that  body,  or  annul  the  pope's 
assumption  and  you  destroy  its  organization.  The  gentleman  rightly 
appreciates  my  argument:  he  feels  that  it  makes  the  church  of  Rome 
a  headless  trunk:  but  the  mistake  is  in  supposing  that  this  annihila- 
tion of  the  pretension  annuls  the  church  of  Christ.  Jesus  Christ  is  in- 
dependent of  the  pope.  He  is  head ;  and  the  saints  of  all  ages  are  the 
component  parts  of  his  spiritual,  his  mystical  body. 

The  gentleman's  allusion  to  the  High  Priest  was  peculiarly  unfor- 
tunate There  never  was  but  one  high  priest  at  a  time  :  one  in  hea- 
ven and  one  on  earth  is  without  a  single  hint  or  allusion  in  the  Bible. 
We  cannot  now  descant  upon  such  an  incongruity. 

The  word  'Jr^t/c  (Hierus)  priest,  occurs  not  once  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, in  reference  to  christian  bishops,  or  deacons.  It  is  only  found 
once,  and  that  in  the  apocalyptic  style,  in  all  the  christian  scriptures : 
for  the  idea  of  any  one  officiating  on  the  earth  as  a  sacrificing  priest,  or 
that  christian  bishops  have  aught  of  a  priestly  character  is  anti-christ- 
ian.  But  Christ  is  the  anti-type  of  Aaron.  The  order  of  Aaron  is  ex- 
tinct. The  order  of  Melchisidec  is  the  model  of  the  Christian  High 
Priesthood.  Christ  is  called  of  God  as  was  Aaron  :  but  he  is  called 
to  officiate  after  the  order  of  Melchisidec.  The  doctrine  of  Protestants 
is,  that  their  High  Priest  made  one  great  sacrifice  for  sin  on  earth : 
and  that  he  offered  it  in  the  heavens  ;  and  that  by  one  offering  of  him- 
self, he  has  perfected  the  sanctified.  "  Brethren,  consider  the  high  priest 
of  our  profession,  Jesus  Christ."  He  ever  lives  and  ever  intercedes, 
and  is  able  to  save  to  the  uttermost  all  that  come  by  him  to  God.  We, 
therefore,  need  no  high  priest  on  earth. 

The  gentleman  has  told  us  too  often  of  his  love  for  America,  and  his 
love  for  England.  If  he  repeats  these  declarations  so  often,  we  shall 
begin  to  think  he  loves  too  much  in  word,  and  too  little  in  fact.  He 
tells  you  of  30,000  English  bayonets  employed  in  defence  of  the  pa- 
pacy. And  what  of  this?  England  is  the  cradle  of  all  political  free- 
dom. Our  notions  of  free  government  were  all  promulged  in  English 
books,  and  taught  in  English  schools  before  they  were  imported  here. 
We  have,  indeed  practised  upon  the  science  of  free  government  more 
than  our  mother  country.  But  as  in  America,  we  tolerate  all  religions : 
so  the  British  empire  in  every  country  where  she  has  territory  or  sub- 
jects, supports  and  protects  all.  England  tolerates  every  thing.  She 
supports  Catholicism  in  Canada,  Episcopacy  in  England,  Presbyteri- 
anism  in  Scotland,  and  Paganism  in  the  East  Indies.  Is  she  not  too 
free  and  tolerant  for  my  opponent,  and  for  many  Protestants  1 !  She 
takes  no  part  against  any  religion.  The  popular  doctrine  in  England 
at  this  moment  is,  that  Church  and  State  ought  not  to  be  amalgama- 
ted, or  consociated  under  the  same  earthly  head.  Indeed,  she  is  dis- 
posed to  follow  her  American  children  very  far  in  this  doctrine. 

The  bishop  seems  to  apply  to  Peter  what  was  common  to  all  the 

apostles,  "  Whatsoever  you  shall  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in 

heaven;  and  whatsoever  you  shall  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in 

heaven."     I  remark  uxjon  this  passage,  that  when  the  Messiah  gave 

k3  8 


114  DEBATE   ON   THE 

the  keys  to  Peter  to  open  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  Jews  and  Geiitilea, 
he  did  not  appropriate  to  him  the  sole  and  exclusive  power  of  binding 
and  loosing:  this  power  he  bestowed  on  all  the  apostles.  For  after 
Peter  opened  the  kingdom,  they  all  introduced  citizens  into  it,  as  well 
as  he ;  and  had  the  same  official  power ;  for  as  John  says,  chap.  20 : 
he  addressed  them  all — "As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  so  do  I  send 
you;  whose  soever  sins  you  remit  they  are  remitted  to  them,  and  whose 
soever  sins  you  retain  they  are  retained  !" — This  was  spoken,  in  sub- 
stance, repeatedly  to  them  all.  It  is  therefore  asserting  too  much,  to 
say  that  Peter  alone  was  gifted  with  this  power.  He  only  used  it 
first.  They  always  exercised  it  in  its  true  intent  and  meaning.  I  shall 
be  glad  to  resume  again  the  regular  order. 

We  have  heard  much  about  the  bishops  of  Rome  and  how  they  can 
be  traced  back  even  to  Peter,  &c.,  &c.  I  wish  my  learned  opponent 
would  confine  himself  to  the  proposition  in  debate,  and  permit  me  to 
go  through  with  this  argument,  for  succession.  Then  I  will  show  of 
how  much  value  are  the  traditionary  enumerations  found  in  EusebiuS; 
from  whose  authors  I  can  make  out  two  or  three  successions. 

The  gentleman  brings  up  the  erudition  of  the  4th  century.  I  would 
as  soon  call  on  people  in  this  room  for  testimony  that  the  battle  of  Ban- 
ker's hill,  or  Blenheim  was  so  and  so  fought — not  one  of  whom  lived 
at  that  time;  as  on  persons  living  in  one  century  to  prove  what  hap- 
pened in  centuries  before  they  were  bom.  In  the  fourth  century  there 
is  one  writer  testifies  to  the  succession.  What  a  decisive  proof !  Is 
there  any  testimony  for  the  first  two  hundred  years  afllirming  this  suc- 
cession 1  I  affirm  that  there  is  not.  All  the  tradition  on  earth  fails 
just  in  this  radical  and  essential  point ! 

Again  :  tradition  is  wholly  silent  on  the  election  of  the  first  popes. 
No  one  pretends  to  tell  how  Peter  and  Linus  and  Clement  were  in- 
vested with  the  office.  Tradition  is  even  in  the  hands  of  Catholics 
ashamed  to  depose  any  thing  upon  this  point.  We  all  know  how  to 
dispose  of  tradition  three  hundred  years  too  late,  in  other  matters;  and 
I  think  to  the  matter  of  fact  people  of  this  generation,  it  must  appear 
preposterous  to  prove  an  event  by  those  who  lived  one,  two,  and  three 
hundred  years  after. 

Irenaeus  was  introduced  as  a  witness  of  Peter's  having  been  bishop 
of  Rome :  but  Irenaeus  does  not  say  so  on  his  own  responsibility :  foi 
he  lived  at  the  close  of  the  second  century.  With  him  it  was  only 
hear-say.  Again,  his  testimony  of  the  church  of  Rome,  having  been 
planted  by  Paul  and  Peter  is  certainly  false ;  and  his  saying  that  Poly- 
carp  was  appointed  bishop  of  Smyrna  by  the  apostles,  greatly  weakens 
his  traditionary  statements  concerning  the  Roman  see :  for  Polycarp 
must  have  been  ordained  in  the  year  97,  as  he  died  in  the  year  147, 
having  been  50  years  bishop  of  Smyrna.  Consequently  it  was  impos- 
sible he  could  have  been  ordained  by  the  apostles :  but  of  this  again. 
While  my  opponent  speaks  so  fluently  of  early  fathers,  and  of  the 
short  interval  of  two  or  three  hundred  years  from  Christ,  he  seems  to 
forget  how  long  a  hundred  years  is,  and  how  few  know  much  about 
the  events  that  happened  a  hundred  years  ago.  Even  now,  in  this  age 
of  books  and  printing,  and  steam  presses,  and  steam-boats,  and  rail- 
o9ds,  and  general  reading,  how  few  of  us  could  accurately,  from  me- 
mory relate  the  history  of  the  American  Revolution  !  And  yet  the  gen- 
tleman talks  about  the  opportunities  of  a  person  to  ascertain  these  his- 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  115 

toric  facts,  one  or  two  hundred  years  after  they  occurred,  from  tradition 
too,  in  an  age  when  all  these  facilities  which  we  enjoy  were  unknown. 
Is  not  this  tradition  a  very  loose  and  uncertain  witness'? — [Time 
expired.] 

Twelve  o'clock^  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

,  Irenaeus  lived  in  the  second  century.  He  was  a  disciple  of  Poly- 
carp,  who  was  a  disciple  of  John  the  evangelist.  Irenaeus,  was  bish- 
op of  Lyons  in  France.  The  chain  of  testimony  consists  of  three  links, 
John  the  evangelist,  Polycarp  of  Smyrna,  Irenaeus  of  Lyons.  John 
told  Polycarp  what  Jesus  did — Polycarp  told  Irenaeus  what  John  had 
told  him,  and  Irenaeus  bears  testimony  here.  This  edition  was  pub- 
lished by  a  Protestant  divine,  named  Nich  :  Gallaisus.  It  is  dedicated  to 
Grindal,  bishop  of  London  ;  and  as  I  do  not  like  to  advance  any  thing 
merely  on  Catholic  testimony,  I  prefer  the  Protestant  to  the  Catholic 
edition  of  this  father's  works.  Irenaeus  distinctly  says  :  "  Since  it 
would  be  very  long  to  enumerate  in  this  volume  the  succession  of  bish- 
ops in  all  the  churches,  by  appealing  to  the  tradition  of  a  church  the 

GREATEST  AND  MOST  ANCIENT  AND  KNOWN  TO  ALL,  which  WaS  found- 
ed and  established  at  Rome,  by  the  two  most  glorious  apostles,  Peter 
and  Paul  ;  a  tradition  which  she  has  from  the  apostles,  and  the  faith 
which  she  announces  to  men,  and  which  comes  down  to  us  through 
the  succession  of  bishops,  we  confound  all  those  who  in  any  way, 
either  through  evil  self  complacency  or  vain  glory,  or  blindness  and 
perversity  gather  otherwise  than  is  meet.  For  with  this  church,  on 
account  of  her  more  powerful  principality,  it  is  necessary  that 
EVERY  CHURCH  AGREE,  that  is  th**  faithful  who  are  on  all  sides,  in 
which  church,  the  tradition  of  the  iipostles  has  been  preserved  by  the 
faithful  who  are  on  all  sides."  Iren.  lib.  iii.  chap.  3,  (adversus  haere- 
ses.) 

Eusebius,  has  preserved  for  us  a  letter,  written  by  the  martyrs  who 
suffered  in  Gaul,  in  the  19th  year  of  Antonius  Verus,  and  who  were 
charged  by  the  Pagans,  as  they  say  in  their  address  to  their  fellow- 
citizens  in  Phrygia,  "  with  feasts  of  Thyestes,  {who  ate  part  of  hia 
own  son,)  and  the  incests  of  (Edipus,  and  such  crimes  as  are  neither 
lawful  for  us  to  speak  nor  to  think,  and  such  indeed,  as  we  do  not  be- 
lieve were  committed."  In  this  document  the  martyrs  commend  Ire- 
naeus, then  a  presbyter  of  the  church  of  Lyons,  to  pope  Eleutherus, 
whom  Irenaeus  appealed  to  on  the  subject  of  the  Quarto-deciman  con- 
troversy. I  have  this  letter  here  in  Greek.  It  may  perhaps  have 
more  authority  if  I  read  the  original. 

Thus  do  we  perceive  that  Eleutherus  was  styled  "father  and  bishop 
of  Rome,"  by  thes^e  "]ustrious  confessors  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  hU 
favor  invoked  in  behalf  of  their  brother. 

In  book  III.  chap.  3,  (the  title  of  this  chapter  is,  of  the  apostolic 
tradition,  or  the  succession  of  bishops  in  the  churches  from  the  apos- 
tles.) "These  blessed  apostles  (Peter  and  Paul),  founding  and  insti- 
tuting the  church,  delivered  the  care  of  administering  it  to  Linus,  of 
whom  Paul  makes  mention  in  his  epistle  to  Timothy.  To  him  suc- 
ceeded Anaclelus,  after  whom  Clement  obtains  the  episcopacy,  in 
the  third  place  from  the  apostles,  who  had  seen  and  conferred  with  the 
apostles,  who  had  heard  their  preaching  sounding  in  his  ears,  and  had 


116  DEBATE    ON    THE 

with  his  own  eyes  heheld  their  traditions.  Nor  was  he  the  only  one- 
there  were  many  more  yet  living  who  had  been  taught  by  the  apostles. 
Under  this  Clement,  when  no  inconsiderable  discussion  occurred 
among'  the  brethren  at  Corinth,  the  church  of  Rome  addressed  to  them 
most  forcible  letters,  gathering  them  together  in  peace,  repairing  their 
failh,  and  announcing  to  them  the  traditions  they  had  recently  receiv' 
ed  from  the  apostles.  To  Clement  succeeded  Euaristus,  and  to  Euaris- 
tus,  Alexander;  next  was  Sextus,  sixth  from  the  apostles,  and  after, 
him  Telesphorus,  who  also  endured  a  most  glorious  martyrdom  ;  then 
Hyginus,  afterwards  Pius,  and  after  him  again  Anicetus.  But  when 
Soter  had  succeeded  Anicetus,  now  in  the  twelfth  place  from  the  apos- 
tles, Eleutherus  hath  the  episcopate."  There  is  then  the  fullest  mani 
festation  that  one  and  the  same  vivifying  faith  has  been  handed  down 
in  the  church  and  preserved  to  the  present  day.  I  would  fain  read 
the  rest  of  this  admirable  chapter,  but  enough — here  is  the  volume  to 
which  all  who  are  anxious  for  more  proof  are  invited  to  refer. 

Tertullian,  a  little  later  says,  confounding  the  heretics  of  his  day— 
"  let  them  produce  the  origin  of  their  churches,  let  them  display  the 
succession  of  their  bishops,  so  that  the  first  may  appear  to  have  been 
ordained  by  an  apostolic  man,  who  persevered  in  their  communion." 
Lib.  de  praescrip.  He  then  enumerates  the  pontiffs  from  St.  Peter,  to 
his  own  time  in  the  Roman  see,  and  concludes  by  the  memorable 
words,  "  Let  heretics  exhibit  any  thing  like  this."  The  evidence 
of  Eusehius  is  also  before  you.  On  this  subject  I  have  one  remark  to 
make,  which  no  one  in  this  assembly  who  sincerely  desires  to  know 
the  truth,  and  of  such  I  trust,  the  number  is  not  small,  will  hear  with 
indifference.  This  is,  that  in  the  letter  of  Cornelius,  bishop  of  Rome, 
to  Fabius,  bishop  of  Antioch  concerning  Novatus,  which  is  given  in 
full  by  Eusebius,  and  is  a  faithful  exhibition  of  the  doctrines  of  the 
whole  church  at  that  early  period,  there  is  not  a  single  doctrine  or 
usage  mentioned,  which  is  not  taught  and  observed  in  the  Catholic 
church  in  this  very  city,  at  this  very  hour.  Is  not  this  an  admirable 
proof  of  the  apostolicity  of  our  church  1  The  supremacy  of  the  pope 
in  the  supplying  of  vacant  sees,  the  sacraments  of  the  holy  eucharist, 
baptism,  confirmation,  orders,  a  hierarchy,  bishops,  priests,  deacons, 
subdeacons,  acolytes,  exorcists,  readers,  porters,  or  janitors ;  asylums 
for  the  needy  and  afflicted — one  bishop  in  a  Catholic  church ;  the 
right  of  excommunication,  acquiescence  of  other  bishops,  personally 
testified  or  by  letter,  in  the  judgment  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  &c. 
&c.  &c.  In  the  same  letter  we  see  heretics  pictured  to  the  life,  the 
errors  and  evil  practices  of  some  modern  sectarians  described  and 
strongly  reprobated,  viz  :  the  forcing  of  communicants  to  take  an  oath 
never  to  quit  a  church  they  have  joined.  This  I  know  to  have  occm- 
red  in  Maryland,  and  I  presume  it  is  not  uncommon. 

Three  o'clock  P.  M. 
Mk.  Campbell  rises — 

The  last  half  hour  of  the  gentleman  was  spent  in  culling  antiquity 
%n  find  some  collateral  evidence  in  attempting  to  defend  the  great  point 
of  the  succession  of  pontiffs  ;  and  with  what  success  you  have  all  seen. 
His  sensibility  on  the  present  occasion  is  truly  gratifying.  His  con- 
duct here  shows  that  he  perceives  it  to  be  vital,  supremely  essential 
to  his  system  to  make  Peter  bishop  of  Rome,  and  to  fix  the  first  twen- 


SOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  117 

ty  nine  linka  in  the  apostolic  chain.  But  the  barrenness  of  ancient 
history  cannot  be  remedied  in  the  nineteenth  century.  He  brought 
forward  one  fragment  of  antiquity  on  the  subject ;  and  it  is  the  only 
fragment  on  which  Eusebius  himself  relies.  In  truth  that  fragment, 
the  Latin  version  of  Irenseus,  is  the  only  fragment  of  antiquity  now 
extant,  or  extant  in  the  time  of  Constantine,  from  which  any  thing 
;an  be  gleaned  on  this  subject.  And  he  never  once  says  that  either 
Paul  or  Peter  separately  or  jointly  were  bishops  of  the  church  of  Rome  ! 
And  here  again  J  cannot  suppress  my  astonishment  at  the  choice  of 
the  Romanists : — Why  they  did  not  make  Paul  rather  than  Peter 
bishop  of  Rome.  In  the  first  place  he  was  a  bachelor ;  and  that  is 
now  a  most  cardinal  point :  again,  he  informs  us  that "  he  had  the  care 
of  all  the  churches."  He  says,  moreover,  that  he  is  not  behind  the 
chief  of  the  apostles.  This  is  rather  disrespectful  of  pope  Peter ! 
It  could  be  so  easily  proved,  too,  that  he  was  once  at  Rome  (though 
a  prisoner  for  two  full  years.)  Now,  if  he  did  not  plant  the  church 
of  Rome  ;  he  certainly  watered  it.  He  labored  more  abundantly  than 
all  the  other  apostles.  Is  it  not  then  ten  fold  more  probable  that 
Paul  rather  than  Peter  was  bishop  of  Rome  T  But  probability  will 
not  do  in  the  case.  We  must  have  the  strongest  evidence :  we  must 
have  contemporary  testimony :  we  cannot  prove  a  fact  by  witnesses 
who  did  not  see  it.  We  require  the  evidence  of  sense.  We  should 
not  believe  the  records  of  Christ's  actions,  even,  unless  we  received 
them  from  eye  and  ear  witnesses.  To  illustrate  the  difficulties  that 
environ  my  ingenious  opponent,  I  will  suppose  a  case  like  the  one  he 
has  to  manage.  Suppose  that  in  the  year  one  thousand,  a  tradition 
had  been  current  that  a  certain  bridge  over  the  river  Tiber  had  been 
built  in  the  time  of  the  apostles,  and  that  Peter  laid  the  corner  stone 
of  the  Roman  abutment.  Some  incredulous  persons  began  then  to  doubt 
of  the  matter,  and  called  upon  those  who  affirmed  that  Peter  laid  that 
stone  to  prove  it.  They  go  to  work.  They  found  very  many  believ- 
ing it  in  the  10th  century;  fewer  in  the  9th,  fewer  in  the  8th,  fewer 
in  the  7th,  till  within  200  years  of  the  time,  they  find  only  one  person 
that  affirms  faith  in  it,  and  with  him  it  is  an  unwritten  tradition.  All 
record  ceases.  There  is  a  perfect  chasm  of  200  years  without  a  sin- 
gle witness.  Hew  shall  they  throw  a  bridge  over  this  chasm  1 
Where  is  tradition  during  this  period  1  Is  there  not  one  voice  1  Not 
ONE.  But  they  say  it  is  only  two  hundred  years  !  But  according  to 
all  the  laws  of  mind  and  society,  these  two  hundred  years  should 
have  the  most  witnesses  :  for,  the  nearer  we  approach  any  true  event, 
the  more  numerous  are  the  vouchers  of  its  reality  and  authenticity. 
Therefore  the  total  failure  of  testimony  during  that  period  is  fatal  to 
the  credibility  of  the  tradition.  But  they  say,  it  was  traditionary  for 
two  hundred  years:  but  who  can  prove  the  tradition  1  It  is  as  hard 
to  prove  this  tradition  as  the  fact !  To  prove  the  existence  of  it  first, 
•nd  then  the  authenticity  of  it  afterwards,  is  only  rising  from  the  po- 
sitive to  the  superlative  difficulty.  We  can  as  easily  build  a  house  in 
the  air  eighteen  stories  high,  leaving  out  the  two  basement  stories,  as 
prove  the  truth  of  an  event  1800  years  old,  finding  a  chasm  of  200 
years  in  which  there  is  not  one  word  about  it.  The  church  of  Rome 
believes  many  miracles  of  her  own  on  mere  tradition.  There  is  a  le- 
gend in  Ireland  to  this  day,  commonly  believed,  that  St.  Patrick  1200 
years  ago  literally  sailed  from  that  country  to  Scotland  on  a  mill  stone. 
Now,  if  we  trace  this  back  we  shall  find  the  evidence  diuiinishes 


118  DEBATE    ON    THE 

with  every  century  until  you  come  within  two  or  three  centuries  of 
the  time  assigned.  Then  it  comes  to  a  solitary  individual,  who  heard 
some  one  say,  that  he  heard  another  one  say,  that  such  a  one 
dreamed  so .' 

I  think  it  would  be  well  to  advert  more  pointedly  to  that  law  of 
mind,  that  the  testimony  of  a  fact  is  always  best  and  strongest  be- 
cause of  the  number  and  opportunity  of  the  witnesses  at  the  time,  or 
near  thi  time  it  actually  existed.  For  exjimple,  at  this  day,  there  are 
many  biographies  of  Washington  and  narratives  of  the  revolutionary 
war ;  some  four  or  five  hundred  years  hence  there  will  be  but  one  or 
two.  This  is  the  established  order  of  things.  Genuine  evidence 
diminishes  as  we  descend  from,  and  increases  as  we  ascend  up  to  the 
events,  or  facts  recorded.  All  history  is  proof  of  this.  It  is  a  law 
of  evid»mce,  and  a  law  of  the  human  mind.  Therefore,  had  Peter 
been  bishop  of  Rome,  we  would,  as  we  advanced  upwards  have  found 
much  more  evidence  of  it  than  in  the  third  and  fourth  centuries.  But 
on  the  subject  of  tradition,  I  will  gratify  my  audience  with  a  few  re- 
marks from  Du  Pin  :  certainly  he  had  no  temptation  to  weaken  its  au- 
thority. 

"Criticism  is  ^  kind  of  torch,  that  lights  aad  conducts  us,  in  the  obscure 
tracts  of  antiquity,  by  making  us  able  to  distinguish  truth  from  falsehood,  his- 
tory from  fable,  and  antiquity  from  novelty.  'Tis  by  this  means,  that  in  our 
times  we  have  disengaged  ourselves  from  an  infinite  number  of  very  common 
errors  into  which  our  fathers  fell  for  want  of  examining  things  by  the  rules  of 
true  criticism.  For  'tis  a  surprising  thing  to  consider  how  many  spurious  book* 
we  find  in  antiquity;  nay,  even  in  the  first  ages  of  the  church.  Several  rcasoni 
induced  men  to  impose  books  upon  the  world,  under  other  men's  names. 

The  first  and  most  general,  is,  the  malice  of  heretics:  who,  to  give  the  great- 
er reputation  to  their  heresies,  composed  several  books,  which  they  attributed 
to  persons  of  great  reputation;  in  which  they  studiously  spread  their  own  er- 
rors, that  so  they  might  find  a  better  reception,  under  the  protection  of  thesfi 
celebrated  names.  And  thus  the  first  heretics  devised  false  gospels,  false  acts 
and  false  epistles  of  the  apostles,  and  their  disciples:  and  thus  those  that  came 
after  them  published  several  spurious  books,  as  if  they  had  been  written  by  or 
thodox  authors,  that  so  they  might  insensibly  convey  their  errors  into  the  minds 
of  their  readers,  without  their  perceiving  the  cheat. 

The  second  reason  that  inclined  people  to  favor  books  under  other  men'i 
Dames,  is  directly  contrary  to  the  first;  being  occasioned  by  the  indiscreet  piety 
of  some  persons,  who  thought  they  did  the  church  considerable  service  in  forg- 
ing ecclesiastical  or  profane  monuments  in  favor  of  religion  and  the  truth.  And 
this  idea  prevailed  with  some  ancient  christians  to  forge  some  testimonies  in  be- 
half of  the  christian  religion,  under  the  name  of  the  Siljle,  Mercvrius  Tris- 
meg-iitits,  and  divers  others:  and  likewise  induced  the  Catholics  to  compose 
some  books,  that  they  might  refute  the  heretics  of  their  own  times  with  the 
greatest  ease.  And  lastly:  the  same  motion  carried  the  Catholics  so  far,  as  to 
invent  false  histories,false  miracles,  andjalse  lives  nf  the  saints,  to  keep  up  th» 
iely  qfthefaitliful. 
•         •••«*•••••**• 

The  third  reason  of  the  forgery  of  some  books,  keeps  a  middle  way  between 
those  we  have  already  mentioned;  for  there  have  been  some  persons  in  the 
world,  that  have  been  guilty  of  this  imposture,  without  any  other  design,  than 
to  divert  themselves  at  the  expense  of  their  readers,  and  to  try  how  nearly  they 
could  imitate  the  style  of  other  men.  Hence  it  is,  that  some  authors  have  com- 
posed treatises  un^er  St.  Cyprian's,  St.  Ambrose's  and  St.  Austin's  names — 
*  *  *  *  *  desiring  rather  (as  the  Abbot  of  Billi  says,)  to  ap- 
pear abioad,and  be  esteemed  under  other  men's  names  than  to  continue  despis 
ed.  and  be  buried  in  darkness,  by  writing  in  their  own.  And  these  are  the  rea- 
sons that  may  have  occasioned  the  forgery  of  books;  malice,  indiscreet  piety 
and  the  humors  of  men. 

But  bciicits  these  reasons  that  have  advanced  this  trade  of  forgery,  there  are 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  119 

tevera]  others  that  have  occasioned  the  setting  authors'  names  to  several  bookst 
which  they  never  writ. 

'Tis  very  ill  done  to  conclude  that  such  a  book  is  spurious,  because  it  pinch- 
es us,  and  afterwards  to  starch  lor  reasons  why  it  may  be  thought  so."  [/"re- 
face,  p.  6,  7. 

We  select  only  one  of  all  these  judicious  and  weighty  remarks, 
from  one  of  the  most  learned  of  Roman  Catholics,  viz.  "  thai  the  Cath- 
olics themselves  have  invented  false  histories,  false  miracles,  and 
FALSE  LIVES  OF  THE  SAINTS,"  to  promote  piety  in  their  own  members, 
from  which  I  emphatically  ask  the  question :  What  is  an  article  of 
faith  ivorth  which  is  founded  alone  upon  the  traditions  of  that  church  ?. 
I  will  only  add,  these  are  the  words  of  Du  Pin,  a  learned  and  authen- 
tic ecclesiastical  historian,  whose  work  is  published  by  the  authority 
of  the  learned  doctors  of  the  Sorbonne. 

I  have,  let  me  now  add,  strong  suspicions  of  the  authenticity  of 
that  passage  of  Irenasus.  The  Greek  original  in  the  first  place  is 
lost :  and  in  the  second  place  the  Latin  translation  was  not  found  for 
some  hundreds  of  years  afterwards.  In  the  third  place,  two  things 
asserted  by  Irenaeus  are  not  true:  1st,  that  Peter  and  Paul  founded 
the  Roman  church ;  whereas  it  has  been  shown  by  Paul's  letter  to 
the  Romans,  not  to  have  been  the  case.  2d.  This  same  Irenaeus  says, 
that  Polycarp  was  ordained  by  the  apostles,  when  according  to  Poly- 
carp  himself,  he  was  not  ordained  till  the  year  97,  when  all  the  apos- 
tles were  dead  save  John,  and  there  is  no  document  to  prove  that  even 
John  lived  till  that  time.     Thus  dispose  we  of  Roman  traditions. 

The  gentleman  first  introduced  this  authority  which  I  have  in  my 
hand — an  Episcopalian  doctor — one  of  the  most  learned  authors  of  the 
present  day,  George  Waddington — "  History  of  the  Church,  1834." 
This  author  enumerates  the  bishops  of  Rome;  but  listen  to  his  own 
candid  testimony.  In  his  chronological  table  of  eminent  men,  and  of 
the  principal  councils,  he  says  : 

"  The  succession  of  the  earliest  Bishops  of  Rome  and  the  duration  of  their  go 
vernment,  are  involved  in  inexplicable  confusion." 

But  I  have  here  before  me  the  Romanorum  Pontificum  Index — a 
chronological  index  of  the  Roman  pontiffs,  prefixed  to  Eusebius.  I 
have  compared  it  for  the  first  two  centuries  with  Eusebius  and  some 
of  the  primitive  fathers,  on  whose  authority  it  partially  rests,  and  I  can 
say  with  confidence  there  is  no  faith  can  be  reposed  in  it.  I  find  the 
authorities  on  which  its  assertions  rest  sometimes  obscure,  frequently 
contradictory,  and  often  at  variance  with  other  facts  which  they  assert; 
involving  the  credibility  of  the  whole  story  of  the  successions  from 
different  chairs.  There  are  the  following  traditions  to  be  collected 
from  Eusebius  and  his  fathers  for  only  the  first  five  links  of  this  chain  • 

"ist.  Lineage.  2nd.  Lineage.  3rd.  Lineage.  4th.  Lineage, 

1.  Peter.  1.  Linus.  1.  Peter.  1.  Peter. 

2.  Linus.  2.  Anacletus.  2.  Anacletus.  2.  Clement. 

3.  Clfctus.  3.  Clement.  3.  Clement.  3.  Linus. 

4.  Clement.  4.  Sixtus.  4.  Alexander.  4.  Cletus. 

5.  Anacletus.  5.  Alexander.  5.  Evaristus.  5.  Alexander. 

I  might  argue  this  subject  for  hours  and  hours,  but  it  is  not  worth 
it.  I  do  not  like  to  imitate  my  opponent  in  dilating  upon matters,which, 
whethertrueorfalse,  dc  not  atfect  the  points  at  issue  the  weight  of  a  fea- 
ther. But  the  display  we  have  now  made  of  the  beginning  of  succes- 
sion, according  to  various  traditions  and  statements,  is  susceptible  of 
immediate  proof,  and  shows  uuVi  vacant  and  dubious  these  oral  and 


15J0  DEBATE   ON    THE 

hearsay  traditions  are.  Is  not  Waddin^on  justified  in  saying  "/Ajs 
matter  is  involved  in  inexplicable  confusion?"  and  well  it  is  that  saving 
fiaith  depends  not  upon  such  testimony ! 

I  have  said  the  Romanists  have  never  been  uniform  in  electing  their 
popes.  I  can  show  some  six  or  seven  different  modes  of  filling 
the  chair  of  Peter,  equally  approved  by  the  church  of  different 
ages.  The  chair  has  often  been  filled  by  bribery,  by  force,  by  the 
bayonet,  and  by  all  sorts  of  violence.  It  has  been  filled  by  men  and 
Doys,  and  by  all  sorts  of  characters.  But  of  this  more  fully  at  an- 
other time. 

The  gentleman  remarked,  on  Saturday,  that  the  pope  is  not  infalli- 
ble. The  question  was  not  about  the  man,  but  the  pope.  I  take  him 
at  his  word,  and  will  now  prove,  that  neither  the  present  pope  nor  his 
predecessors  are  successors  of  Peter;  because  Peter  was  infallible, 
both  in  doctrine  and  in  discipline.  How,  then,  can  these  fallible 
gentry — these  fallible  popes — be  successors  to  Peter,  in  the  capa- 
city of  officers,  when  they  have  not  the  grace  of  office, — my  opponent 
himself  being  judge? 

I  shall  now  attempt  continuously  to  show,  that  if  even  Peter  had 
been  placed  by  a  positive  precept  in  the  office  of  vicar  and  head  of  the 
church,  all  the  official  grace  of  such  an  appointment  has  failed  by  the 
various  schisms  in  the  Roman  see.  The  chain  has  been  broken  ;  for 
Roman  Catholics  themselves  admit,  at  least,  twenty-two  schisms; 
some  count  twenty-six.  Protestants  can  find  twenty-nine.  I  have  al- 
ready shown  that  the  hook  and  the  first  link  must  be  better  secured, 
if  not  welded ;  for  Peter  the  hook  and  first  link  has  not  yet  been  fas- 
tened to  the  right  place ;  and  some  of  the  first  links  are  so  entangled 
that  Eusebius,  the  pope,  and  G.  Waddington,  cannot  strengthen  them. 
And  to  quote  the  words  oi  A.  Pope,  not  the  pope,  if  one  link  be  missing, 
"  Tenth  or  ten  thousandth  breaks  the  chain  alike." 

Ah  me !  I  am  jostled  out  of  my  course  again  !  The  mention  of 
Eusebius  reminds  me  that  the  bishop  has  quoted  him  against  the  No- 
vatians,  &c.  But  what  avails  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  as  a  sectary? 
It  is  quoting  a  Jansenist  against  a  Jesuit — a  Calvinist  against  an  Ar- 
minian — a  Romanist  against  a  Protestant.  Eusebius  speaks  as  a  his- 
torian, and  he  speaks  as  a  sectary;  sometimes  Arian,  perhaps,  some- 
times Trinitarian ;  but  certainly  opposed  to  Novatus  and  his  party. 
It  is  very  hard  for  a  warm  partizan>  in  any  case,  to  state  his  opponent's 
views  fairly.  I  have  never  yet  heard  any  one  oppose  Calvinism,  or 
Arminianism,  just  precisely  as  it  was.  There  is  some  little  difference 
or  other  in  the  most  equitable  hands,  which  the  opposite  party  would 
ot  have  stated  just  so;  and  we  know  how  often  the  merits  of  contro- 
versy rests  upon  these  minute  matters.  Novatus  and  Cornelius  were 
both  elected  bishops  of  Rome,  and  a  controversy  arose  on  their  respec- 
tive claims.  In  the  course  of  the  controversy,  we  learn,  that  it  turned 
on  these  two  points : 

"  That  Cornelius  admitted  thosev)hohadbeenguilty  of  Idolatry  to  comtnuTOon; 
and  Novatus  taught  that  the  church  neither  could  nor  ought  to  admit  those  to  the 
communion  that  had  apostatized."     Dii  Pin.  Vol.  I.  p.  135. 

Novatus  was  the  rival  of  his  friend  Cornelius,  and  he  regards  him 
as  an  anti-pope ;  he  is,  indeed,  called  anti-pope  1st.  And,  at  this  day, 
we  cannot  tell  whether  Novatus  or  Cornelius  was  the  successor  of 
Peter  .     So  tb.^  first  schism  commenced,  and  we  look  for  the  faithful 


KOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  121 

Witnesses  a^inst  Roman  assumption  from  that  hour  amongst  the  Re- 
monstrants— call  them  the  Novatians,  Puritans,  or  Protestants. 

The  second  schism  we  shall  notice  is  that  between  Liberius  and 
Felix,  A.  D.  367. 

"  Constantius  being  enraged  against  St.  Athanasius',  as  supposing  him  the  cause 
of  that  enmity  which  his  brother  Constans  had  against  him,  Liberius  as  to  this 
answered  wisely,  you  ought  not,  sir,  to  make  use  of  bishops  to  revenge  your 
quarrels  ;  for  the  hands  of  ecclesiastics  ought  not  to  be  employed,  but  only  to 
bless  and  to  sanctify.  At  last  Constantius  threatened  him  with  banishment;  'I 
have  already,'  says  he, '  bid  adieu  to  my  brethren  at  Rome,  for  the  ecclesiastical 
laws  are  to  be  preferred  before  my  living  there.'  Three  days  time  were  given 
him  to  consider  of  it,  and  because  he  did  not  change  his  opinion  in  that  time  he 
wa«  banished  two  days  after  to  Berea  a  city  of  Thrace.  The  emperor,  the  em- 
press, and  the  eunuch  Eusebius,. offered  him  money  to  bear  the  expenses  of  his 
lourney,  but  he  tefused  it,  and  went  away  cheerfully  to  the  place  of  his  banish- 
ment. The  clergy  of  Rome  having  lost  their  head,  took  an  oath  to  choose  no- 
body in  tlie  room  of  Liberius  as  long  as  he  was  alive  ;  but  Constantius,  by  the 
management  of  Epictetus  bishop  of  Centumcellar  in  Italy,  procured  one  Felix  a 
deacon  to  be  ordained  bishop,  who  was  himself  also  one  of  them  tliat  had  sworn 
not  to  choose  a  bishop  in  the  room  of  Liberius  *  »  *  But  Liberius,  who  had 
given  proof  of  so  great  constancy  in  time  of  peace,  could  not  long  endure  the 
tediousness  of  banishment ;  for  before  he  had  been  two  years  in  it,  he  suffer- 
ed himself  to  be  over  persuaded  by  Demophilus  bishop  of  that  city,  ofwhich  he 
was  banished,  and  did  not  only  subscribe  the  condemnation  of  St.  Athanasius  ; 
but  he  also  consented  to  an  heretical  confession  of  faith." — D%t  Pin.  Vol.  I.  p.  190. 

Now,  if  we  take  Liherius  for  the  true  pope,  we  must  take  an  ^rian 
head;  for  it  must  be  acknowledged  that  he  subscribed  the  heretical 
and  Arian  creed ;  and,  perhaps,  at  this  time  the  majority  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  church  were  Arians  ;  but  that  is  not  the  present  inquiry. 

We  shall  now  read  an  account  of  the  third  schism : 

D.tMASUS,   BISHOP  OF   ROME. 

"  After  the  death  of  pope  X,t6ert?(«,  which  happened  in  the  year  369,  the  see 
of  Rome  being  vacant  fo»  some  time,  by  reason  of  the  caballing  of  those  that  pre- 
tended to  fill  it,  Damasus  at  last  was  chosen  by  the  greater  part  of  the  clergy 
and  people,  and  ordained  )oy  the  bishops.  But  on  the  other  side,  Urtinus, 
or  rather  Ursicinus,  who  was  his  competitor  for  the  popedom,  got  himself 
ordained  bf  some  other  bishops  in  the  church  of  Sicinus.  This  contest  caused 
a  great  division  in  the  city  o(  Rome,  and  stirred  up  so  great  a  sedition  there  as' 
could  hardly  be  appeased.  The  two  parties  came  from  words  to  blows,  and 
many  christians  were  killed  in  the  churches  of  Rome  upon  this  quarrel.  The 
governor  of  Rome  called  Pratextua,  being  desirous  to  allay  the  heat  of  this 
contention,  sent  Ursicinus  into  banishment  by  the  emperor's  order:  but  big 
banishme  it'did  not  perfectly  appease  the  quarrel;  for  the  partizans  of  Ursicinus 
assembled  still  in  the  churches  ofwhich  they  were  possessed,  without  ever  com- 
municating with  Damasus;  and  even  when  the  emperor  had  ordered  that  their 
cliurches  should  betaken  from  them,  they  still  keptup  their  assemblies  withoutthe 
city,  so  that  it  was  necessary  at  last  to  drive  them  quite  out  of  Rome.  And  yet  all 
this  did  not  hinder  Ursicinus  from  having  his  secret  associates  in  Italy  and 
»t  Rome.  The  bishop  oi  Putcoli  called  Florentius,  and  the  bishop  of  Parma  were 
most  zealous  for  his  interests.  They  were  condemned  in  a  council  held  at  Rom* 
■  in  the  vear372,  and  afterwards  banished  by  the  authority  of  the  emperor.  How- 
ever they  found  means  to  return  into  their  own  countrv,  and  stirred  up  new 
troubles  ihere.  They  got  pope  Damasus  to  be  accused  by  one  Isaac,  a  Jew. 
Tliis  accusation  was  examined  in  a  council  of  bishops  held  at  Rome,  in  the  year 
378,  which  declared  Damasus  innocent'of  the  crime  that  was  laid  to  his  charge. 
This  council  wrote  a  letter  to  the  emperor  Gratian,  praying  him  to  take  some 
order  for  the  peace  of  the  church  of  Rome.  The  emperor  wrote  to  them,  that 
Ursicinus  was  detained  at  Cologne,  that  he  had  given  order  to  banish  Isaac  in- 
to a  corner  of  Spain,  and  to  force  the  bishops  of  Puteoli  and  Parma,  out  of  theii 
country.  Thi^  did  not  hinder  C/r»icrnu»' from  returning  into  Italy  in  the  yeaj 
381,  where. he  stirred  up  new  tumults,  and  endeavored  to  pre-engage  the  empe 
ror:  but  the  bishops  oi  Italy  being  assembled  in  a  council  at  Aquileia,  in  Um 
L  16 


122  DEJATE   OX    THE 

year  381 ,  wrote  so  smartly  to  him,  that  he  banished  {7r«cinwi  forever,  anJ  lelt 
Damasris  in  peaceable  possession  of  the  see  of  Rome,  in  which  he  continued  u»- 
til  the  year  384."     Du  Pin.  rol.  L  p.  226,227.— [Time  expired.] 

Half  past  3  o'clock,  P.  3L 
Bishop  Purceli,  rises — 

In  the  2nd.  century  lived  TertuJUan — a  priest  in  Africa.  He  sliowed 
how  clear  was  the  chain  of  tradition — he  says  distinctly  that  Peter  wa* 
bishop  of  Rome.  I  ana  goin^  to  quote  another  splendid  passage  from 
his  testimony..  But  first  let  me  ask,  how  could  a  massive,  an  enormous 
volume  like  this  (holding  it  up)  of  which  the  zeal  of  the  early  Christ- 
ians, has  made  so  many  copies  ;  and  a  portion  of  which,  the  admirable 
apologetic,  or  defence  of  our  Christian  ancestors,  was  addressed  to  the 
Pagan  Emperors,  have  been  vitiated  ?  It  was  spread  over  the  whole 
world — it  was  read  with  avidity  by  Christians  and  heathens.  It  iss 
authentic  history  and  based  on  testimony  far  more  credible  than  we 
possess  of  the  genuineness  of  Homer,  or  Horace,  of  Tacitus,  or  Cicero. 
We  could  not  believe  any  fact  of  history,  not  even  our  title  to  our  houses 
and  other  goods  and  chattels,  without  admitting  it.  How  else  but  by 
such  records,  do  we  know  with  certainty  of  events  of  which  our  senses 
have  not  taken  cognizance,  of  whieh  we  have  no  personal  knowledge,  that 
a  few  years  ago  we  fought  a  hard  battle  with  England  and  gained  our 
independence  ?  That  our  general  was  named  Washington,  and  that  he 
was  aided  by  La  Fayette  1  Comparatively  recent  as  these  events  be,  they 
are  matters  of  tradition!  and  tradition  is  but  another  name  for  history. 
Admit  my  learned  opponent's  principle,  and  the  world  will  be  turneo 
topsy-turvy.  We  cannot  be  sure  of  any  thing.  I  now  cite  Tertullian; 
and  mark,  I  pray  j'ou,  the  c/earness  and  force  of  his  reasoning  in  the 
following  syllogism,  for  apoi'olical  succession.  « 

Tertullian  de  praescriptione  adveraae  hasreticos,  lib.  p.  394.  "  If  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  sent  his  apostles  to  preach,  r»o  other  preaches  are  to  be  received  than 
those  whom  he  commissioned  :  for  »o  one  knows  the  Father  but  the  Son.  and 
they  to'whom  the  Son  hatli  revealed  him,  nor  is  the  Soil  seen  to  have  reveal- 
ed him  to  any  others  than  the  apostles,  whom  be  seat  to  preach  what  he  reveal- 
ed to  them.  jVow  what  they  preached,  that  is  to  say,  what  Christ  revealed  tc 
them,  I  will  here  lay  down  as  a  principle  (hie  prKScribam)  camiot  he  otherwise 
proved  than  by  the  same  churches  which  the  apostles,  themselves,  founded,  by 
preaching  to  them,  themselves, both  by  word  or  mouth,  as  the3'  say,  and,  after- 
wards, by  their  epistles.  If  this  be  so,  it  is  therefore  plain  that  all  the  doctrine- 
which  agrees  with  these  apostolic  churches,  the  matrices andoi-iginals  (or  exem- 
plars) of  faith,  is  to  be  reputed  true,  as  umloubtedly,  holding  that  which  the 
churches  received  from  the  apostles,  the  apostles  from  Christ,  and  Christ  fron» 
God  :  but  that  all  other  doctrine  is  to  be  prejudged  false,  as  teaching  conlrari 
ly  to  the  churches  and  to  the  apostles,  to  Christ  and  to  God.  AH,  therefore, 
that  remains  now  to  be  done  is  to  demonstrate  that  the  doctrine  we  preach,  ai 
alreadv  explained,  has  been  handed  down  to  us  from  the  apostles,  and  thus  con- 
vict all  other  doctrines  of  fafsehood "  Thev,  (the  heretics)  object   that  Peter 

was  reprehended  by  Paul.  But  let  those  wfio  make  this  allegatioi>  shew  that 
Paul  preached  a  different  gospel  from  what  Peter  preached  and  the  other  apos- 
tles. If  Peter  was  reprehended  for  withdrawing,  through  human  respect,  from 
intercourse  with  the  Gentiles,  with  whom  he  previously  associated,  this  was  » 
fault  of  eoiiduct  (conversationis)  not  of  preaching.  He  di'd  not,  on  this  account, 
preach  a.ditlerent  God  from  the  Creator,  a  ditferent  Christ  from  the  son  of  ^la- 
ry,  a  different  hope  from  that  of  the  resurrection — and,  (to  refute  these  here- 
tics,) I  will  answer  as  it  were  for  Peter,  that  Paul,  himsielf,  said  that  he  made 
iiimself,  all  things  to  all  njen,a  Jewto  the  Jews,  and  no  Jew  to  those  who  were 
nr  Jews,  that  he  may  gain  all.  So  that  Paul  reprehended,  undeif  certain  cii» 
cumstanccs,  io  Peter,  whitt  he,  himself,  under  certaiu  cicciuustaBces,did," 


SOMAN"  CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  123 

But  I  :night  rpad  the  whole  book  of  prescriptions  by  TertulHan 

against  heretics. 

The  fish  story  again — here  is  Henry's  exposition  of  the  Bible.  The 
principal  meaning,  in  his  view,  is  that  which  I  have  given. 

Could  Paul,  my  friends,  claim  to  be  the  chief  of  the  apostles?  He 
had  probably  done  more  than  any  man  then  living  against  Christiamty, 
until  prostrated  by  anger  and  mere)',  on  the  road  to  Damascus  "  Saul, 
Saul,  why  persecutest  thou  me"  changed  him  from  a  wolf  to  a  lamb, 
from  a  persecutor  to  an  apostje. 

Eusebius  informs  us  that  Paul  of  Samosata,  was  deposed  by  a  coun- 
cil in  consequence  of  the  heresy  introduced  by  him  at  Antioch,  of  which 
a  detailed  account  had  been  rendered  by  the  council  to  Dionysius,  bish- 
op of  Rome.  Paul  being  unwilling  to  leave  the  building  of  the 
church,  "an  appeal  was  made  to  the  emperor  Aurelian,  who  decided 
most  equitably  on  the  business,  ordering  the  building  to  be  given  up 
to  those  whom  the  christian  bishops  of  Rome  and  Italy  should  write." 
Another  Pagan,  Ammianus  Marcellinus,  giving  an  account  of  the 
persecution  raised  by  the  emperor  Constantius  against  the  famous 
patriarch  of  Alexandria  St.  Athanasius,  tells  us  that  this  emperor 
strove  hard  to  procure  the  condemnation  of  Athanasius  by  Liberius,  on 
account  of  the  supreme  authority  enjoyed  by  the  bishops  of  the  Roman 
see."  "  Even  from  the  mouths  of  babes  and  sucklings,"  says  the 
Scriptures,  "  hath  God  made  perfect  praise."  I  may  observe,  that  he 
has  extorted  testimony  from  Pagan  kings  and  historians,  to  prove  the 
authority  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  throughout  the. Christian  world. 

My  friend  has  introduced  the  subject  of  unity,  in  connection  with 
tradition.  We  shall  argue  that,  if  he  pleases,  from  the  Bible;  but  in 
the  mean  time  let  us  hear  Cyprian,  a  bishop  of  Carthage,  in  Africa, 
on  this  subject,  in  the  3d.  century.  I  am  bold  to  say,  you  have  never 
heard  argument  stronger,  illustration  more  apposite,  or  language  more 
beautiful,  than  what  this  father  employs. 

Cyprian,  de  Uiiitate  Ecclesi*  Catholica?,  p.  181,  and  De  Simplici  Praes.  The 
primacy  is  given  to  Peter  that  the  churrh  and  the  chair  of  Clirist  may  be  shewn 
to  be  one.  And  all  the  apostles  and  shepherds,  but  there  is  seen  but  one  flock, 
fed  by  all  the  apostles  with  unanimous  consent  ;  can  he  who  hoideth  not 
this  unity,  believe  he  holds  the  faith  ?  Can  he  who  resists  and  opposes  the 
church,  who  forsakes  the  chair  of  Peter,  on  which  the  cnurch  was  founded,  flat- 
ter himself  that  he  is  in  the  church,  while  the  apostle  Paul  teaches  (he  same 
thing  and  shews  the  sacrament  of  unity,  saying,  "oVe  body  AND  ONE  spirit, 

ONE  HOPE  of  your  VOCATION,  ONE  LoRD,  ONE  FAITH,  ONE  BAPTISM,  ONE 

God."  Let  no  man  deceive  the.  brotherhqod  by  a  lie  ;  let  no  man,  by  perfidi- 
ous prevarications  corrupt  thetiuA  of  faith  !  The  episcopacy  is  one,  each  se- 
parate part  being  consotidateil  in  one.  Th«  church  too  is  one,  with  luxuriant 
fertility  extending  her  branchrs  throughout.  As  there  are  many  rays  of  light, 
but  no  more  than  one  sun,  many  brancnes,  but  only  one  trunk,  field  fast  in  the 
earth  by  its  tenacious  root,  many  streams  gushing  from  one  fountain,  but  all 
blended  in  their  source.  Sever  a  ray  from  the  sun,  the  unity  of  light  suffers 
D<)  division  ;  break  a  branch  from  the  tree,  the  broken  branch  will  bud  no  more, 
cut  off  a  stream  from  the  source,  the  severed  stream  will  dry  up.  So  likewise 
the  chuich,  irradiated  with  the  light  of  the  Lord,  difluses  her  rays  throughout 
the  universe.  The  light,  however,  which  is  every  where  diffused  is  one.  nor  is 
the  unity  of  the  body  separated.  She  spreads  her  copious  streams,  but  there  is 
one  head,  one  origin,  one  bles.sed  mother  with  a  numerous  progeny-  We  are 
her  olTspring,  we  are  nourished  with  her  milk,  we  are  animated  with  her  spirit, 
He  can  no  longer  have  God  for  his  father,  who  has  not  the  church  for  his  moth- 
er. If  any  one  out  of  the  ark  of  Noe  could  f-scape,  so  likewise  he,  that  is  out 
of  the  church  may  escape.  The  Lord  says,  I  and  the  Father  are  one  :  again,  it 
is  written  of  the  Father,  and  Sou,  and  Holy  Ghost:  "  and  these  three  are  one,' 


1.24  .  DEBATE    ON    THE 

and  can  any  one  imagine  that  the  unity  which  proceeds  from  divine  strength 
and  which  is  maintained  by  divine  sacraments,  can  be  torn  asunder  in  the  church 
and  destroyed  by  the  opposition  of  discordant  hearts  .'" 

I  will  now  go  over  the  ground,  my  friend  travelled  this  morn- 
ing. He  said  we  allowed  that  we  had  two  high  priests  on  earth.  1 
protest  against  the  gentleman's  saying  for  me  what  I  have  not  said. 
Oi}e  high  Priest  we  have  in  heaven,  God.  He  has  a  vicar  on  earth, 
•the  pope.     But  that  vicar  wields  no  authority  but  from  God.. 

1  have,  again,  been  reprehended  for  endeavoring  to  gain  friends  by 
expressing  a  liking  for  the  English  people,  the  Irish,  and  the  Ameri- 
cans. But,  my  friends,  have  I  done  them  more  than  justice  1  Have  I 
Bwen^uirom  the  truth?  Have  I  not  said  that  the  Englist  had  a 
thousand  faults] — [Time  expired.] 

Ibur  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Mr.  Campbkll  rises — 

We  have  had  a  learned  discussion  on  the  unity  of  the  church.  We 
can  sit  and  patiently  hear  my  opponent  while  he  fills  up  his  time  by 
reading  the  views  of  the  saints  on  unity  or  any  thing  else  he  may 
deem  edifying.  But  as  this  is  not  the  business  now  before  us,  we 
shall  be  glad  he  would  choose  some  other  time  for  it.  On  this  sub- 
ject we  have  no  controversy  at  the  present  time :  and  that  the  church 
should  be  one,  and  that  she  is  one  virtually  and  in  fact,  we  doubt  not. 
All  that  has  been  read  by  my  opponent  on  this  subject  is  wholly  a 
free  will  offering,  instead  of  that  argument  which  the  occasion  demands. 

Was  Peter  ever  bishop  of  Rome  1  That  indeed  was  a  question  :  but 
is  it  a  standing  question  1  How  often  will  my  opponent  recur  to  it 
without  proving  it  ?  He  says,  indeed,  that  Irenajus  says  that  he  was  : 
but  I  say,  not  a  line  can  be  shown  from  Irenaeus  nor  any  other  writer 
of  the  first  two  centuries  affirming  in  so  many  words  that  Peter  was 
bishop  of  Rome!  Let  him  then  refute  me  at  once,  by  producing  the 
passages.  He  might  have  heard  so.  He  has  produced  Tertullian  as 
a  commentator  or  a  reta'ler  of  traditions.  That  you  may  know  some- 
thing of  Tertullian  as  a  theorist,  and  commentator,  I  will  read  you  by 
way  of  offset  a  sample  or  two,  simply  to  show  how  much  these  opi- 
nions are  worth.  He  speaks  very  advantageously  of  custom  and 
tradition,  and  relates  several  remarkable  examples  of  ceremonies  which 
he  pretends  to  be  derived  from  tradition. 

"  To  begin,"  says  he,  "  with  baptism,  when  we  are  ready  to  enter  into  the  wa 
ter,  and  even  before  we  make  our  protestations  before  the  bishop,  and  in  th« 
church,  that  we  renounce  the  devil,  all  his  pomps  and  ministers  :  afterward,  we 
are  plunged  in  the  water  three  times,  and  they  make  us  answer  to  some  thing* 
which  are  not  precisely  set  down  in  the  gospel :  after  that  they  make  us  taste 
miik  and  honey,  and  we  bathe  ourselves  every  dny,  during  that  whole  week.  Wt 
receive  the  sacrament  of  the  eucharist,  institute.!  by  Jesus  Christ,  when  we  eat, 
and  in  the  morning  assemblies  we  do  not  receivt-  it  but  from  the  hands  of  thoie 
that  preside  there. '  We  offer  yearly  oblations  for  the  dead  in  honor  of  tht  mar- 
tyrs. We  believe  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  fast  on  a  Sunday  and  to  pray  to  Goa 
kneeling.  From  Easter  to  Whitsuntide  we,  enjoy  the  same  privilege.  We  take 
g^at  care  not  to  suffer  any  part  of  the  wine  and  consecrated  bread  to  fall  to  the 
ground.  We  often  sign  ourselves  with  the  sign  of  the  cross.  If  you  demand  a 
lawfor  lliese  practices  taken  from  scripture,  we  cannot  find  one  there  ;  but  wt 
must  answer,  that  His  tradition  that  has  established  them,  custom  has  authorized 
them,  andfaith  has  made  them  to  be  observed."     Tertnll.  De  Corona  .Militis. 

When  Tertullian  asserts  a  fact,  I  believe :  but  when  he  relates  a 
dream,  a  guess,  an  opinion,  or  reports  a  tradition,  I  listen  to  him  as 
to  the  speculations  of  a  contemporary.  You  shall  have  it  both  in 
Latin  and  EnorUsh. 


KOMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGION.  •         125 


\ge  jam  qui  voles  curiositatem  iiiellus  exercert  in  negotio  salutis  tuae,  per- 
!  ecclesiasapostoiicas,  apud  quas  ipste  aclhuccatliedne  apostoioruin  suis  iocis 


A?  ,      -  . 

curre  ecclesiasapostoiicas,  apud  quas  ipste  adiiuccatliedne  apostoioruin  suis  iocis 
prdBsidentur,  apud  quas  ipse  autiienticai  literae  recitantur,  sonates  voceni,  et 
rieprajsentantes  facieiii  uniuscujusque.  Pl-oxinia  est  tibi  Aciiaia?  Habes  Corintimm. 
Si  non'  longe  es  a  Macedonia,  liabes  Piiilippos,  liabes  Tiiessalonicenses.  Si  pe- 
te* in  Asinni  tendere,  liabes  Ephesuni.  Si  auteni  Italia:  adjaces,  habes  Romam, 
lilide  nobis  quoque  auctoritas  pnesto  est." 

"  Conic  now,  vou  who  are  desirous  more  fully  to  devote  yourselves  to  the  great 
affair  of  your  salvation,  hasten  to  the  apostolic  churches.  Still  do  the  very 
chairs  of  the  apostles  yet  stand  in  their  own  places:  still  are  their  authentic  lettert 
recited,  which  sound  forth  their  very  tones,  and  which  faithfully  exhibit  their 
'ery  countenances.  If  you  are  in  Achaia,  you  have  Corinth:  if  in  Macedonia,  yon 
have  Philippi  and  Tliessaloiiica.  If  you  journey  into  Asia,  you  have  Ephesus. 
If  Italy  be  your  residence,  vou  have  Home,"  A;c. 

On  this  precious  excerpt  I  will  only  remark  that  it  fully  proves, 

1.  That  the  authentic  copies  or  auto^aphs  of  the  apostolic  epistles 
were  extant  in  the  time  of  Terlullian,  in  those  churches  to  which 
they  were  addressed. — 

2.  That  the  superiority  of  these  churches  named  above  others,  so 
far  as  salvation  was  concerned,  was,  that  they  had  these  authentic 
epistles  carefully  preserved  and  read. — 

3.  That  as  respected  authority  in  the  grand  affair  of  salvation,  in 
the  judgment  of  Tertullian,  Corinth,  Philippi,  Thessalonica,  Ephesus 
and  Rome  were  equal. — Pardon  the  digression.  The  extract  is  worth 
a  volume  in  prostrating  the  arrogant  pretensions  of  Rome. 

One  word  on  the  text,  as  commented  on  by  Matthew  Henry.  1 
have  had  his  work  in  my  library  for  twenty  five  years.  He  is  a  high- 
ly esteemed  practical  commentator  :  but  is  not  ranked  among  critics. 
But  yet  he  decides  nothing  for  my  opponent.  He  admits  that  it  may 
be  either  the  one  or  the  other  explanation.  But  mind  me.  The  Roman 
Catholic  doctrine  requires  the  explanation  "  lovestthou  me  more  than 
these  love  me ;"  because  it  was  on  account  of  a  supremacy  of  love 
over  all  the  apostles,  that  it  claims  for  Peter  the  supremacy.  Bui 
Henry  admits  that  Christ  may  have  alluded  to  the  nets  and  boats  andL 
occupation  of  Peter;  while  he  refers  to  or  says,  "do  you  love  me 
more  than  your  companions."  The  Messiah  never,  indeed,  had  any 
jealousy  of  that  sort.     His. comment  on  John  xxi.  15,  reads: 

"  Lovest  thou  me  more  ttiaii  tiiese"  .'  Better  than  James  or  John  thy  intimate 
friends,  or  Andrew,  thy  own  brother  and  companion?  Those  do  not  love  Christ 
aright,  that  do  not  love  him  better  than  the  best  friend  inthe  world,  and  make 
It  appear,  whenever  they  stand  in  competition,  or,  more  than  these  things 
these  boats  and  nets!  Those  only  love  Christ  indeed,  that  love  him  better  than 
all  the  delights  of  sense  and-  all  the  occupations  and  profits  of  this  world.  Lav 
est  thou  me  more  than  these?  If  so,  leave  tRem  to  employ  thyself  wholly  in 
teeding  my  flock."     Henry's  Commentary. 

But  I  would  like  to  read  what  this  commentator  says  about  the  rock. 

Matthew  xvi.  18.  '•  And  I  say  unto  thee,  that  thou  art  Peter;  and  upon  this 
rock,  I  will  build  my  church;  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  ])revail  ag&iust  it.'" 

Peter's  confession  contains  that  fundamental  truth,  respecting  the  person  and 
offices  of  Christ,  upon  which,  as  on  a  rock,  he  would  build  his  church.  JVor 
could  the  powers  of  death  or  the  entrance  into  the  eternal  world,  destroy  the 
hope  of  those  who  should  build  on  it.  Nothing  can  be  more  absurd  than  to  sup- 
pose that  Christ  meant  that  the  person  of  Peter  was  the  rock,  on  which  the 
church  should  be  builded ;  except  it  be  the  wild  notion  that  the  bishops  of  Rome 
have  since  substituted  in  his  place!  Their  rock  is  not  as  our  rock,'our  enemies 
themselves  being  judges.  Without  doubt,  Christ  himself  the  rock — and  tried 
foundation  of  the  church,  and  woe  be  to  him  who  attempts  to  lay  any  other,   lb. 

If  then,  Matthew  Henry  is  good  autnority  on  one  point  he  is  good 
n  the  other. 
L  2 


126  '  DEBATE    OX    THE 

Bishop  Otey  of  Tennessee  has  been  unceremoniously  dragged  intr 
this  controversy.  He  is  a  gentleman  for  whom  I  entertain  a  very 
high  regard  :  and  while  we  differ  on  "some  questions,  concerning  dio 
cesan  episcopacy,  we  perfectly  agree  on  the  import  of  'itgu?  (HierusJ 
a  priest,  as  applied  to  christians.  He  has  no  idea,  more  than  myself 
of  a  christian  hierus^  or  priest  offering  sacrifices  for  sins  on  earth.  He 
has  not  answered,  indeed,  seven  letters  addressed  to  him  by  myself  on 
bishop  Onderdonk's  tract  on  diocesan  episcopacy  :  but  yet  it  is  not 
too  late.     We  expect  one  of  these  bishops  to  reply  to  them. 

The  Roman  Catholics  alone  contend  that  priests,  by  which  they 
mean  an  order  of  clergy,  can  offer  sacrifice  for  sins.  Nay,  indeed, 
Mr.  Hughes  in  his  controversy  with  Mr.  Breckenridge,  says,  "  To  offer 
sacrifice  is  the  chief  official  business  of  the  priests."  p.  288.  Hence, 
we  learn  that  even  in  this  enlightened  land  and  19th  century,  there 
are  persons  amongst  us  claiming  the  power  of  making  sin  offerings 
and  expiating  and  forgiving  sins  !! 

We  now  resume  the  history  of  schisms  in  the  succession : 

We  last  read  you  the  contentions  and  havoc  of  human  life  on  the 
succession  of  Damasus.  The  emperor  at  that  time  decided  the  con- 
troversy by  banishing  Ursinus,  and  on  the  decision  of  that  emperor 
now  rests  the  faith  and  salvation  of  the  Roman  church — themselveh 
being  judges.  And  yet,  my  learned  opponent,  in  some  of  his  speeches 
affects  to  tell  you  that  emperors  have  nothing  to  do, — no  right  to  in 
terfere  in  councils,  or  with  church  officers ;  and  here,  and  on  numer 
ous  occasions,  we  find  them  filling  Peter's  chair,  making  vicars  ot 
Christ,  and  heads  for  his  church.!! 

We  cannot  rehearse  all  the  schisms,  and  shall  therefore  give  only 
a  specimen.  We  take  another  instance  of  an  imperial  pope — one  of 
an  emperor's  creation. 

"Alter  the  death  of  pope  Zozinius,  the  church  of  Rome  was  divided  about 
the  election  of  his  successor.  The  archdeacon  Eulalius,  who  aspired  to  the 
bishopric  of  Rome,  shut  himself  up  in  the  church  of  the  Lateran,  with  part  of  the 
people,  some  priests,  and  some  deacons,  and  made  them  choose  him  in  Zozimus' 
room.  On  the  other  side  a  great  number  of  priests,  several  bishops,  and  part 
of  the  people,  being  assembled  in  the  church  of  Theodora,  elected  Boniface. 
Both  were  ordained;  Eulalius  was  ordained  by  some  bishops,  among  whom  was 
the  bishop  of  Ostia,  who  used  to  ordain  the  bishop  of  Rome/  Boniface  wa« 
likewise  ordained  by  a  great  number  of  bishops,  and  went  to  take  possession  of 
St.  Peter's  church. 

Svmmachus,  governor  of  Rome,  having  tried  in  vain  to  make  them  agree,  wril 
to  the  emperor  Honorius  about  it.  In  his  letter  of  the  29th  of  December,  418, 
he  speaks  in  Eulalius'  behalf,  and  judges  Boniface  to  be  in  the  wrong.  The 
emperor  believing  his  relation,  sent  him  word  immediately-  that  he  should 
expel  Boniface  and  uphold  Eulalius.  The  governor  having  received  this  order 
sent  for  Boniface  to  acquaint  him  with  it,  but  he  would  not  come  to  him,  so  that 
the  governor  sent  to  him  to  signify  the  emperor's  order,  and  kept  him  from  re- 
turning into  the  city.  The  bishops,  priests,  and  the  people  that  sided  with 
Boniface,  wrote  immediately  to  the  emperor  to  entreat  him  that  he  would  ortler 
both  Eulalius  and  Boniface  to  go  to  court,  that  their  cause  might  there  be 
judged.  To  satisfy  them,  the  emperor  sent  to  Symmaclms  an  order  of  30th  of 
January,  419,  signifying  that  he  should  enjoin  Boniface  and  Eulalius  to  bi-  at 
Jtavenna  about  the  6th  of  February.  Honorius  convened  some  bishops  thither 
to  judge  of  their  cause;  and  that  they  might  not  be  suspected  of  favoring  any 
one  side,  he  commanded  that  none  of  those  who  had  ordained  either  of  them, 
should  be  a  judge  in  the  case.  The  bishops  that  were  chosen  lo  judge  this 
cause  being  divided,  the  emperor  put  off  the  judgment  till  J\Iai/,  and  forbade 
Eulalius  aad  Boniface  to  go  to  Rome;  and  sent  thither  »^c/n7/i«*,  bishop  of 
Spoleta   to  perform  the  Episcopal  functions  during  the  Easter  holydays  ;  ir  ' 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    HELIGION  127 

which  time  he  prepared  a  numerous  synod,  and  invited  the  bishops  both  of  Africa 
and  Saul;  but  Euialius  could  not  endure  that  delav>  and  spoiled  his  business 
by  his  impatience;  for  whether  he  distrusted  his  risnt,  or  whether  he  was  of  a 
restless  temper,  he  returned  to  Rome  the  16th  o(  Juarxh,  and  woukl  have  staid 
there  notwithstanding  the  emperor's  orders,  vvhicii  obliged  Symmachus  to  use 
violence  to  drive  him  out  of  Rome;  and  the  emperor  having  been  informed  of 
bis  disobedience,  waited  for  no  other  iudgni«nt,  but  causeJ  Boniface  to  be  put 
in  possession  in  thi-  begiiming  of  April,  419." — Bu  Pin,  vol.  I.  p.  417. 

The  Holy  Spirit,  then,  by  the  emperor  Honorius, — an  Arian,  too 
(if  I  recollect  right,)  establishes  a  vicar  for  Christ  in  the  person  of 
Boniface  I.  What,  says  bishop  Purcell,  have  emperors  to  do  with 
Christ's  church  ] !  Once,  then  they  had  a  great  deal  to  do  with  it ; 
and  where  is  infallibilitjr  now  ? 

Next  comes  pope  Symmachus.  Again  the  church's  head  is  the 
fruit  of  bloodshed  and  war. 

"After  the  dtath  of  pope  Anasianus,  ■w)aic\i  happened  at  the  end  of  the 
year  498,  there  was  a  fierce  contention  in  the  church  oi  Rome  between  Lmu- 
rentiiis  and  Symmachus,  which  of  them  two  was  duly  promoted  to  that  see.  Sym- 
machus  who  was  deacon,  was  chosen,  and  ordained  by  the  far  greater  number; 
but  F-istus  a  Roman  Senator,  who  had  promised  the  Emperor  Anasiasius,  that 
his  edict  of  agreement  with  the  bishop  oi  Rome  should  be  signed,  procured 
Laiirentius  to  be  chosen  and  ordained.  This,  schism  divided  the  church  and 
the  city  of  Rome,  and  the  most  eminent  both  of  the  clergy  and  the  senate  took 
part  with  one  of  these  two  bishops:  but  at  length  both  parties  agreed  to 
wait  upon  King  Theodoric  at  Ravenna  for  his  decision  in  the  case,  which  was 
this.  That  he  should  coniinne  bishop  of  Rome,  who  had  been  first  chosen,  and 
should  he  found  to  have  the  far  greater  number  ^voices  for  liim.  Symmachtis 
had  the  advantage  of  Laurentius  on  both  these  accounts,  and  so  was  eonfirnieei  in 
the  possession  ot  the  hoi}'  see,  and  he  ordained  Laurentius  bishop  of  JVocera, 
if  we  may  believe  Anaslasiits.  At  the  beginning  of  the  next  year  he  called  a 
council,  wherein  he  made  a  canon  against  the  ways  of  soliciting  nuns'  voices, 
which  were  then  used  for  obtaining  the  papal  dignity :  but  those  wl)o  opposed  the 
ordination  of  Sytnmachus,  seeing  hnu  possessed  of  the  holy  see  against  their  mind, 
used  all  their  endeavours  to  turn  him  out  of  it,  for  which  end  they  charged  him 
with  many  crimes,  they  stirred  up  a  part  of  the  people  and  senate  against  him, 
and  caused  a  petition  to  be  presented  to  king  Theodoric,  that  he  would  appoint 
a  delegate  to  near  the  cause.  He  named  Peter  bishop  of  Aliinas,  who  deposed 
the  pope  from  the  government  of  his  diocese,  and  deprived  him  of  the  possessions 
of  the  church.  This  division  was  the  cause  of  so  great  disorders  in  Rome,  that 
from  words  they  came  many  times  to  blows,  and  every  day  produced  fighting  and 
murders:  many  ecclesiastics  were  beaten  to  death,  virgins  were  robbed,  and  driven 
away  frcmi  their  habitationr,  nian\'  lay-men  w«re  wounded  or  killed,  insomuch  that 
not  only  the  c/i«rcft,  but  also  the  city  of  Rome  suHered  very  much  by  this  schism. 

King  Theodoric  being  desirous  to  put  an  end  to  thesedisorders,  called  a  coiincil; 
wherein  the  bishop  being  possessed  with  a  good  opinion  of  Pope  Symachvs,  would 
not  enter  upon  the  examination  of  the  particulars  alleged  against  him,  but  oiilyr 
declared  him  innocent  before  his  accusers,  of  the  crniies  that  were  laid  to  his 
charge:  and  they  prevailed  so  far  by  their  importunity,  that  the  king  was  satisfied 
with  this  sentence,  and  both  the  people  and  the  senate  who  had  been  very  much 
irritated  against  Symmachus,  were  pacified, and  acknowledged  him  for  pope.  Yet 
•onie  of  the  discontented  party  still  remained,  who  drew  up  a  writing  against  the 
■ynod  and  spread  their  caliiinnies,  forged  against  Symmachus,  as  far  as  the  east, 
"the  emperor  Atiaslasius  objected  them  to  him,  which  obliged  Symmuchns  to  writ* 
a  letter  to  him  for  his  -awn  vindication;  but  notwithstanding;  these  efi'orts  of  nis 
enemies,  he  continued  in  possession  of  the  holy  see  until  the  year  514  wherein 
he  died."     Du  Pin.  Vol.  1.  p.  527. 

If  we  cannot  find  Christ's  church  some  where  out  of  the  Roman 
shurch  at  this  time,  we  shall  have  a  hard  task  to  find  her  there ! 

Again,  we  shall  read  a  few  words  concerning  Eoniface  II. 

'•  lionij'iicc,  the  second  of  that  name,  the  first  pope  of  the  nation  of  the  Goths,  was 
promoted  to  the  holy  see,  under  the  reign  of  king  .\laricus  on  the  14ti)>»a}'  of  Oc- 
tobo  ,  ill  the  year  529.   At  the  same  time  one  part  of  Che  clergy  chose.  Dioscoriis 


128  .  DEBATE    OlS    THE 

who  was  formfirly  one  of  the  deputies  sent  into  the  east  by  Hormisdas.  Boniface 
was  ordained  in  the  church  of  Julius,  and  Dioscorus  in  that  of  Constantine.  But 
this  last  died  the-  12th  day  of  November.  Boniface  seeing  himstlf  leit  in  sole 
possession  used  his  utmost  endeavors  to  bring  over  those  who  had  been  of  the 
other  party :  he  threatened  them  with  an  anathema,  and  forced  theju  to  subscribe. 
He  called  together  the  clergy,  and  condemned  the  memory  of  Dioscorus.  accusing 
him  of  simony.  He  proceeded  yet  further,  and,  as  if  it  were  not  enough  for  him 
to  be  secured  of  the  holy  see  for  himself,  he  would  also  appoint  himself  a  suc- 
cessor, and  having  called  a  synod,  he  engaged  the  bishops  ancl  clergy  by  oath,  and 
under  their  hands,  that  they  should  choose  and  ordain  in  his  room  the  deacon 
Vigilius  after  his  death.  This  being  against  the  canons,  he  hiniself  acknowledged 
publicly  his  fault,  and  burned  the  writing  which  he  extorted  from  them."  Du  Pin. 
Vol.  I.  p.  542. 

What  an  excellent  head,  truly,  for  the  church  of  Christ ! 

We  shall  next  see,  that  other  women  besides  queen  Elizabeth, 
whom  my  opponent  denounces  for  being  head  of  the  English  church, 
had  something  to  do  in  pope  manufacturing. — Pope  Sylverius  and 
pope  Vigilius  come  next: 

"The  deacon  Vigilius  remained  at  Constantinople  after  the  death  of  Agapetus, 
who  had  for  a  longtime  aspired  to  the  bishopric,  and  made  use  of  this  occasion 
to  get  himself  promoted  to  it.  He  promised  the  empress,  that  if  she  would 
make  him  pope  he  would  receive  Theodosius,  Authiuius,  and  Severus  into  his 
conununion,  and  that  he  vvould^approve  their  doctrine.  The  empress  not  only 
promised  to  make  him  pope,  but  also  offered  him  njoney  if  he  would  do  what 
she  desired.  Vigilius  having  given  the  empress  a_ll  the  assurances  that  she  could 
wish,  departed  with  a  secret  order  addressed  to  Bellisariusto  make  him  success- 
ful in  his  design.  Vi^lius  being  come  into  Italy,  found  all  things  well  prepared 
for  him,  the  siege  of  Rome  was  raised  when  he  arrived  there,  but  during  the 
sje'^e  Sflverius  was  suspected  to  hold  correspondence  with  the  Goths,  and  so  he 
was  rendered  odious  for  refusing  expressly  to  accept  the  empress's  proposals  of 
receiving  Authinius.  Thus  Vigilius  having  delivered  to  Bellisarius  the  ordei 
which  he  brought,  and  having  promised  him  two  hundred  pieces  of  gold  over 
and  above  the  seven  hundred  which  he  was  to  give  him,  found  no  great  difficulty 
to  persuade  him  to  drive  away  Silverius." 

»  *  »  »  ♦  ' 

"  This  was  put  in  execution,  he  was  delivered  to  the  guards  of  Vigilius,  and 
he  was  banished  into  the  Isles  of  Pontienna  and  Panctataria,  which  were  ovel 
against  the  mount  Cirrellus,  where  he  died  of  a  famine  in  great  misery,  if  we 
may  believe  Liberatus.  Procopius,  in  his  secret  history,  seems  to  insinuate,  that 
he  was  killed  by  one  named  Eugenius,  a  man  devoted  to  Antonina — the  wife  of 
Bellisarius:  but  what  Procopius  says,  may  be  understood  not  of  the  death  of 
Silverius,  but  rather  of  his  accusation  or  a'pprehension."  , 

««  »*  «**»»« 

"  Although  Vigilius  was  promoted  to  the  see  of  Rome,  by  a  wav  altogether 
wijust,  yet  he  continued  in  the  possession  of  it  after  the  death  of  Silverius,  and 
was  acknowledged  for  a  lawful  pope,  without  proceeding  to  a  new  election,  or 
even  confirming  that  which  had  been  made.  The  conduct  which  he  had  observ- 
ed during  this  pontificate  answered  well  enough  to  its  unhappy  beginning.  He 
had  at  first  approved  the  doctrines  of  Authinius,  and  that  of  the  Acephali,  to  sat- 
isfy the  empress:  but  the  fear  of  being  turned  out  by  the  people  of  Rome,  whom 
be  hated,  made  him  quickly  recall  this  approbation;  yet  he  did  not,  by  this, 
gain  the  hearts  of  the  Romans.  They  could  not  endure  an  usurper,  who  Laving 
been  the  cause  of  the  death  of  their  lawful  bishop,  ^vould  abuse  thein  also.  They 
accused  him  also,  of  having  killed  his  secretary  with'a  blow  of  his  fist,  and  of 
having  whipiped  his  sister's  son  till  he  died.  The  empress  who  was  not  satis- 
fied with  hirii  because  he  had  gone  back  from  his  word,  sent  Authinius  to  Rome 
with  an  order  to  bring  him  into  Greece,  and  at  his  departure  the  people  gave 
him  all  sorts  of  imprecations.''     Ih.  Vol.  I.  png-e  552. 

We  shall  only  at  this  time  give  the  details  of  another  column  of 
the  history  of  the  popes  In  the  work  before  us.  It  speaks  for  itself 
— tells  how  all  the  evil  passions  of  human  nature  co-operated  in  the 
election  and  creation  of  Christ's  vicars. 


KOMAIf    CATHOLIC    RELIGIOX.  129 

Under  head — "An  account  of  the  popes,  and  of  the  church  of  Rome,  from  the 
lime  of  Sylvester  II.  to  Gregory  VII.  'After  his  death  there  was  a  schism  ia 
the  church  of  Rome,  between  Benedict  VIII.  son  to  Gregory,  the  count  of 
Frescalt,  who  was  tirst  elected  by  his  fallier's  interest;  and  one  Gregory,  who 
was  elected  by  some  Romans,  who  outed  Benedict.  He  fled  to  Henry,  king  of 
Germany,  who  immediately  raised  forces,  and  marched  into  Italy  to  re-establish 
him.  As  soon  as  the  king  arrived,  Gregory  fled  for  it,  and  Benedict  was  re- 
ceived without  any  opposition.  He  conferred  the  imperial  crown  on  that  prince, 
and  on  queen  Chunegonda  his  wife.  Benedict  died  in  the  year  1034, and  some 
authors  say,  that  after  his  .death  he  appeared,  mounted  on  a  black  horse,  and  that 
he  showed  the  place  where  he  had  deposited  a  treasure,  that  so  it  might  be  dis- 
tributed to  the  poor,  and  that  by  these  alms,  and  the  prayers  of  St.  OJilo,he  was 
delivered  from  the  torments  of  tJie  other  life.  We  have  only  one  Bull  of  his, 
in  favor  of  the  Abby  of  Cluny." 

"  The  count  oi  Fresrati,  that  the  popedom  might  be  still  in  his  family,  caused 
his  other  son  to  be  elected  in  the  room  of  Benedict  VIII.  though  he  was  not 
then  in  orders.  He  was  ordained  and  called  John,  which,  according  to  us,  is  the. 
eighteenth  of  that  name,  but  according  to  others  the  twentieth.  'Tis  said,  that 
seme  time  after  this  pope  being  sensible  that  his  election  was  vicious  and  simo- 
niacal,  hewitlidrew  into  a  monastery  there  to  snlTer  jienaiice,  and  that  he  forbore 
performing  any  part  of  his  function,  till  such  time  as  he  was  chosen  again  by  the 
clergy." 

"John  XVIII.  dying  Novr.  7,  in  the  year  1033,  Alberi  count  of  Frescati, caus- 
ed his  son  to  be  seated  on  St.  Peter's  chair.  He  was  nephew  to  the  two  last 
popes  the  count's  brothers,  and  was  not  above  eighteen  v  ears  of  age  at  the  most. 
He  changed  his  name  of  Thophylact  into  that  of  Benedict  IX. 

Peter  Darnien,  speaks  of  him  as  a  man  that  lived  very  disorderly,  and  was  very 
unworthy  of  that  dignity  to  which  he  had  been  advanced  by  the  tyranny  of  his 
father.  However,  he  enjoyed  the  popedom  very  quietly  for  ten  years  together; 
but  at  last  the  Romans,  weary  of  his  abominable  irregularities,  outed  him,  and 
put  up  in  his  place,  the  bishop  of  St.  Sabina,  who  took  upon  him.  the  name  of 
Sylvester  III.  He  enjoyed  his  dignity  but  three  months;  for  though  Benedict 
voluntarilr  resigned  the  popedom,  yet  he  returned  to  Rome,  and  with  the  assis- 
tance of  Frescati's  party,  drove  out  his  competitor,  and  re-assumed  the  papal 
chair.  But  being  altogether  uncapable  of  governing  it,  and  having  nothing  more 
in  his  thoughts  than  the  Ratifying  of  his  brutal  appetite,  he  made  a  bargain  about 
the  popedom  with  John  Gracian,  archbishop  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and  made 
it  over  to  him  for  a  sum  of  money,  reserving  to  himself  the  revenues  due  from 
England  to  the  holy  see.  This  Gracian  took  upon  him  the  name  of  Gregory  VI 
In  the  meantime,  king  Henry,  who  had  succeeded  his  father,  Conrad,  in  the  year 
1039,  being  incensed  against  Benedict,  who  had  sent  the  imperial  crnwu  to  the 
king  of  Hungary,  after  he  had  defeated  that  prince,  resolved  to  march  into  Iialy 
to  put  an  end  to  that  schism.  After  he  came  thither  he  caused  these  three  popes 
to  be  deposed  in  several  synods  as  usurpers,  simonists,  and  criminals.  Benedict 
fled  for  It ;  Gregory  VI.  was  apprehended  and  afterwards  banished;  and  Svlves- 
ter  III.  was  sent  back  to  his  bishopric  of  St.  Sabina.  He  caused  Suidger,  liishop 
of  Hamberg,  to  be  elected  in  their  stead,  who  took  upon  him  the  name  of  Cle- 
ment II.  and  was  acknowledged  as  lawful  pope  by  ail  the  world.  He  crowned 
Henry  emperor,  and  as  he  was  waiting  upon  him  home  to  Germany,  died  beyond 
the  Alps,  October  7,  in  the  year  1047,  nine  months  after  his  election.  Immedi- 
ately upon  this,  Benedict  IX.  returns  to  Rome,  and  a  third  time  remounts  the 
papal  chair,  which  he  held  for  eight  months,  notwithstanding  the  emperor  had 
lent  from  Germany  Poppo,  bishop  of  Bresse,  who  was  consecrated  pope  under  the 
title  of  Damasus  \l.  but  he  did  not  long  enjoy  that  dignity,  for  he  died  of  poison, 
as  is  supposed,  at  Palestrina,  three  and  twenty  days  alter  Viis  coronation." 

"  It  is  no  wonder  that  these  pojies  have  not  left  us  the  least  monument  of  their 
pastoral  vigilance,  either  in  councils  or  by  letters,  since  all  their  care  and  aim 
was  how  to  gratify  their  ambition  and  the  rest  of  their  passions,  without  watch- 
ing over  the  flock  of  Jesus  Christ."     Dii  Pin,  vol.  ii.  p.  206. 

Observe,  a  single  count  has  the  controlling  power  of  some  three 
pop6s  during  this  administration ;  and  may  be  said  to  have  the  church 
under  his  special  management!  Comment  on  such  a  narrative  is  un- 
uecess2u:v. — [Time  expired.] 

9 


130  DEBATE    ON    THE  * 

Half-past  4  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Pcrckll  rises — 

I  should  prefer  replying  to  the  last  part  of  my  friend's  argument  at 
once,  but  order  requires  that  I  should  follow  him  through  a'l  his  points. 

We  Were  told  the  '  old  Irish  story'  of  St.  Patrick  sailing  on  a  mill- 
stone. Well,  the  Irisli  have  always  been  remarkable  for  telling  a  good 
story;  but  this  is  told  for  them,  and  it  is  not  even  witty,  much  less  has 
it  any  bearing  on  the  argument.  There  is  not,  I  presume,  one  educated 
Catholic  in  the  world  who  believes  a  tale  so  ridiculous.     For  my  own 

fart,  I  had  never  even  heard  it  before;  but  I  have  heard  of  a  life  of  St. 
'atrick  and  St.  Bridget,  written  by  some  young  Protestant  wag  who  gath- 
ered together  all  the  absurd  stories  he  could  find  and  gave  them  this  name. 
My  friend  must  have  felt  the  want  of  better  arguments  when  he  intro- 
duced such  a  silly  tale,  at  this  debate,  for  the  purpose  of  weakening 
the  authority  of  the  most  sacred  documents.  I  will  not  call  this  pro- 
fane, b'lt  I  must  say,  that,  in  my  opinion,  it  is  indecorous. 

I  have  been  charged  with  exciting  the  laughter  of  this  audience,  at 
the  expense  of  my  friend  ;  this  is  not  my  fault ;  what  alternative  but 
ridicule  for  the  story  we  have  just  heard?  It  was  thus  that  E lias 
mocked  the  false  priests  of  Baal,  by  saying,  "  Cry  louder  on  your 
god — peradventure  he  sleepeth  and  must  be  awaked."  3d.  Kings 
15,  27. 

Admit  ray  learned  opponent's  reasoning,  and  yon  cannot  be  sure  that 
ever  there  was  such  a  man  as  Peter:  admit  it,  and  you  cannot  pre- 
tend to  say  that  you  have  had  grandfathers  or  grandmothers,  or  at  least 
that  they  had  had  any  themselves :  you  have  never  seen  them ;  how  then 
can  you  be  sure  they  ever  existed  !  Sometimes  forged  notes  get  into 
circulation ;  conclude  with  my  friend,  that  you  may  as  well  part  com- 
pany at  once  with  the  genuine  notes  you  may  poss^ess,  for  you  cai>nc 
longer  prove  them,  to  any  man's  satisfaction,  to  be  worth  having.  I 
will  go  still  farther:  admit  Mr.  C.'s  curious  reasoning,  and  you  can 
never  be  sure  that  such  a  personage  as  Jesus  Christ  ever  existed,  much 
less  that  he  wrought  miracles  to  prove  the  divinity  of  his  mission  ! 
You  did  not  see  the  miracles ;  the  book  that  records  tliem  was  written 
long  after  they  occurred  ;  and  many  of  the  most  important  portions  of 
this  very  book  were  doubted  of  for  upwards  of  300  years  after  Christ, 
even  by  Luther  himself,  in  the  enlightened  16th  century  !  His  author 
Du  Pin,  says  there  were  abundance  of  false  gospels,  false  epistles,  false 
acts,  in  the  early  ages.  How  then,  cucording  to  his  priticip/es,  can  we 
be  sure  of  the  authenticity  of  a  single  book  of  the  Old  or  New  Testament^ 
seeing  we  have  no  voucher  for  the  truth  but  the  testimony  of  men? 
Here  are  chasms  to  be  bridged,  and  links  in  the  chain  of  scriptural . 
testimony,  to  be  welded,  for  full  300  years,  ay,  1600  years,  before  the 
various  books  of  scripture  were  collected  together :  and  when  they 
were  collected,  this  collection  was  made  by  men,  who,  he  says,  were 
liable  to  be  mistaken  like  ourselves;  and  who  knows  to  this  day  but 
they  were  mistaken !  Such  are  the  horrid  consequences  of  his  illogi- 
cal reasoning — another  sad  illustration  that,  for  the  deserter  from  the 
Catholic  church,  there  is  no  resource  but  to  deny  every  thing,  to  be- 
come a  deist.  I  would  advise  my  friend,  when  he  goes  baclv  to  Bethany, 
to  prove  in  the  Harbinger  that  such  a  thing  as  the  present  controversy 
never  occurred.  I  am  sure  that  he  can  make  some  people  believe,  all 
editorials  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding,  that  it  is  all  a  hoax. 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  131 

He  gratuitously  mixes  up  the  names  of  the  first  five  or  six  popes,  in 
a  way  unknown  to  antiquity,  whereas  Eusebius,  Optatus,  Tertullian, 
and  Irenaeus,  ^a^xee perfectly  in  the  enumeration  of  Peter,  Linus,  Anacle- 
tus,  Clement,  Evaristus,  Alexander — and  two  of  these  authors  have 
been  translated  by  Protestants  !  The  mixture  of  the  books  of  scrip- 
ture is  for  him  a  far  more  insurmountable  difficulty.  There  was  much 
disputing  for  hundreds  of  years  as  to  the  time  and  place  where  the 
epistles  and  gospels  were  written ;  must  we,  therefore,  reject  thera 
altogether  1  According  to  his  rule  of  reasoning,  we  should  reject 
them  ;  but,  thank  God,  Catholics  admit  no  such  rule.  A  few  discre- 
pancies about  the  minor  points,  where  there  is  perfect  unanimity  as  to 
the  substance,  only  confirm  our  conviction  of  the  historian's  good  faith. 
And  there  is  as  much  indisputable  testirhony  of  the  succession  in  the 
chair  of  Peter,  as  there  is  to  prove  any  book  of  scripture  whatsoever.  I 
might,  in  fact,  say  there  is  more.  I  have  already  nailed  Dupin  to  the 
counter;  he  leans  on  a  broken  reed.  He  quotes  St.  Paul,  to  prove  that 
neither  he  nor  Peter  founded  the  church  of  Rome,  whereas  St.  Paul 
says  no  such  thing,  but  only  that  they  should  not  indulge  in  foolish 
disputes  about  the  ministers  who  had  preached  to  them  the  word  of 
life,  "I  am  for  Paul,  I  am  for  Apollos,"  but  give  all  glory  to  Christ 
who  died  for  them.  There  were  christians  at  Rome  before  St.  Petei 
or  St.  Paul  went  thither.  The  Roman  soldiers  who  saw  Christ  cruci- 
fied, and  witnessed  the  prodigies  attending  his  death,  were,  doubtless, 
many  of  them,  as  well  as  the  cetjturion  who  smote  his  breast,  and  cried 
out  "  truly  this  man  was  the  So7i  of  God,''''  converted  to  Christianity  ; 
who,  when  they  returned  home  to  Rome,  related  what  they  had  seen, 
to  their  countrymen,  and  made  others  converts.  The  apostles,  after- 
wards, went  to  Rome  and  founded  the  see.  So  it  was  in  England.  Long 
before  Gregory  sent  St.  Augustin  to  that  country,  there  were  Catholics 
th«re — even  in  the  days  of  pope  Eleutherius. 

Wliat  was  the  use  of  quoting  Waddington  as  an  author  of  infallible 
weight  with  me?  He  could  not  avoid  making  splendid  acknowledg- 
ments to  the  church  of  Rome.  The  truth' was  too  strong  for  him.  But 
if  we  believe  a  man  when  he  testifies  against  himself,  is  that  any  rea- 
son we  should  believe  him  when  he  testifies/or  himself?  In  fiict,  the 
inexplicable  confusion  of  which  Waddington  speaks,  is  not  to  be  found 
in  any  of  the  historians  I  have  named  and  whose  works  I  have  exhi- 
bited— from  which  too  I  have  read  to  this  assembly.  If  any  confusion 
exist,  it  is  with  respect  to  the  time  when  each  succeeded  each,  al- 
though in  this  respect  the  earliest  historians  agree,  as  you  have  seen. 
Linus,  Cletus,  (or  Anencletus,)  and  Clement,  are  all  spoken  of  in  the 
epistles  of  St.  Paul.  They  held  a  conspicuous  rank  in  the  church  ; 
their  names  and  services  in  these  high  places  were  often  seen,  and 
hence  could  have  occurred  a  mixture  of  their  names  and  of  the  dates 
of  their  pontificates,  among  now  remote  historians.  But  in  every  case 
of  doubt  as  to  scripture,  or  ecclesiastical  history,  the  tests  of  sound 
criticism  must  be  applied,  and  then  the  sibyls  and  the  Mercurius  Tris- 
megistus  are  sure  to  go  overboard.  "  Opinionum  commenta  delet  dies,^^ 
says  Cicero,  ^■''tnaturse  fudicla  confirmat,''''  Time  exposes  falsehood — 
and  confirms  truth.  What  Cicero  says  time  does,  a  more  respectable 
agent,  the  church,  has  achieved — she  has  selected  the  genuine  books 
of  scripture  and  stamped  forgery  upon  such  as  were  spurious.  Had 
she  not  done  this  where  would  have  been  the  Bible?     There  are  othei 


132  DEBATE    ON    THE 

ways  of  detecting  error — Du  Pin  has  told  you  of  them.  "  A  third  class," 
says  he,  "forge  for  their  diversion."  You  have  all  heard  of  the  late 
prodigious  humbug  at  Exeter  Hall,  England.  The  king  suppresses  the 
Orange  lodges.  The  bigots  of  the  nation  rally.  They  invite  a  general 
convention  of  their  brother  bigots  throughout  the  empire;  a  champion, 
it  was  the  notorious  Dr.  McGhee,  is  invited  from  Ireland.  He  pro- 
fesses to  have  discovered  a  document  penned  by  the  reigning  pontiff, 
and  addressed  to  the  clergy  of  England  and  Ireland,  that  recommended 
all  the  crimes  that  could  be  thought  of  to  be  committed. against  the 
Protestants.  The  crowd  is  gathered.  The  conquering  hero  comes.  The 
air  is  vexed  with  the  cries  of  "  down  with  the  Catholics," — "long 
life  to  McGhee  !"  He  opens  his  mouth,  but  he  cannot  speak.  His  emo- 
tions overpower  him — some  broken  accents — the  title  of  the  document 
is  heard.  "Simpleton,"  says  a  tremulous  voice  from  the  crowd,  "the 
Rev.  Mr.  Todd,  of  Trinity  college,  Dublin,  fortjed  and  t>ublished  that 
document  for  his  own  diversion  and  that  of  his  friends,  just  to  see  how 
he  could  imitate  the  pope's  Latin,  but  never  dreaming  that  any  man 
of  sense  could  believe  that  he  intended  to  impose  it  on  the  world  as  a 
genuine  production  of  the  pope  I"  McGhee  was  thunderstruck — the 
meeting  horrified,  and  one  by  one  they  slunk  away  to  their  homes, 
muttering  benedictions  upon  Irish  bull-makers!  This  was  diverting; 
but  the  consequences  of  such  diversions  were  not  always  as  harmless 
to  the  poor  Catholics ;  in  fact  they  had  frequently  cost  them  torrents 
of  blood.  The  celebrated  Dr.  Parr,  Dr.  Johnson,  Nix,  Whittaker,  all 
agree  that  the  Catholic  is  the  most  calumniated  society  on  earth. 

My  friend  should  know  that  the  Latin  translation  of  Irenaeus  is  good 
authority,  according  to  the  soundest  rules  of  criticism.  It  was  made 
in  the  lifetime  of  Irenaeus,  who  Avrote  the  preface  to  it  himself ;  by 
birth  a  Greek,  he  was  bishop  of  a  Latin  see,  (Lyons,)  and  he  says 
he  hopes  the  reader  will  excuse  the  roughness  of  his  style,  for  he  had 
been  so  long  among  the  Celtae  that  he  had  lost  the  purity  of  his  native 
tongue.  His  proximity  to  the  apostles  is  proof  of  the  clearness  of 
the  testimony  in  his  day.  Polycarp  was  converted  in  the  year  80-— 
and  St.  John  lived  to  the  close  of  the  first  century — so  that  John 
taught  Polycarp,  and  Polycarp  taught  Irenaeus.  We  all  know  why 
Jacob  (supplanter,)  Sara  (Lady,)  Isaac,  (laughter,)  Peter,  (a  rock,) 
were  so  called — was  there  a  reason  for  the  giving  of  these  names  to 
all  but  Peter]  The  reason  my  friend  alleges  is  not  H  ,■  Peter  was  not 
the  first  convert,  it  was  his  brother  brought  him  to  Christ.  John  i. 
41,  42.  The  word  head  is  figurative;  this  remark  cuts  up  the  web 
of  sophistry  my  friend  has  spun  around  it.  The  pope  is  Peter's  suc- 
cessor without  being  all  and  every  thing  that  Peter  was,  without  being 
a  fisherman,  a  swordsman,  a  man  of  impulsiveness,  a  martyr.  He 
succeeds  to  all  the  power  necessary  to  guide  the  church.  The  other 
apostles  were  infallible,  as  my  friend  admits,  and  yet  their  successors 
claim  not  to  be  so,  individually ;  it  is  enough  for  every  purpose  of 
good  government  that  they  are  so  when  they  abide  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
entire  church.  Liberius  never  erred  in  faith  ;  and  Du  Pin  himself  is 
proof  of  his  orthodoxy.  He  defended  th^  faithful  Athanasius  against 
Constantius  and  the  Arians  his  accusers!  And  yet  Mr.  C.  would 
have  us  believe  Liberius  an  Arian  !  He  preferred,  he  said,  to  go  into 
exile  rather  than  break  the  ecclesiastical  laws  against  his  ownconsci'^ 
ence.  Is  not  this  one  of  the  most  heroic  sayings  recorded  of  popes? 
The  formula  he  signed  in  exile  atPerea,  in  Thrace,  was  not  heretical. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    BELIGION.  133 

t)Ut  when  this  act  was  abused  by  the  Arians,  Liberius  wept  bitterly 
for  the  violent  interpretation  the  document  was  made  to  bear.  The 
clergy  of  Rome  appreciated  the  pontiff's  magnanimity,  they  had  no 
doubt  of  his  faith  ;  they  would  have  no  other  pope — Felix,  the  crea- 
ture of  the  emperor  Constantius,  they/  justly  despised ;  and,  as  in 
every  similar  instance,  the  righteous  cause  prevailed ;  God  was 
stronger  than  the  emperor,  truth  than  error.  So  did  the  synod  ap- 
prove Damasus,  and  reject  his  rival. 

Tertullian  was  quoted  about  the  Eucharist,  and  prayers  for  the 
dead ;  I  vriil  show  you  how  his  testimony  is  in  our  favor.  Talking 
of  Corinth,  Ephesus,  and  other  cities,  he  says  to  the  inquirer,  if  you 
want  to  find  the  established  doctrine  and  live  near  Corinth,  go  to 
Corinth  to  find  it  out;  if  near  Ephesus,  to  Ephesus;  if  near  to  Rome, 
go  to  Rome,  and  so  on.  This  only  proves  that  the  doctrine  at  all 
these  places  was  exactly  the  same ;  but  what  is  the  argument  1  Does 
it  prove  that  all  these  churches  were  equal  in  authority  to  Rome  1 
Suppose  a  man  in  New  York  writes  to  me  to  know  what  the  Catholic 
doctrine  in  any  point  is — I  tell  him  he  must  apply  to  the  bishop  or 
clergy  of  the  churches  of  New  York  for  information.  Does  it  follow 
from  tliis  that  I  question  the  preeminent  authority  of  Rome  ?  Does  it 
prove  any  thing  whatever*  It  is  so  far  in  our  favor  that  it  proves  a 
uniformity  of  doctrine — like  the  unity  of  that  light  which  proceeds 
from  a  common  fountain. 

Mr.  C.  is  stricken  with  the  authority  of  Peter — it  haunts  him  like 
a  spectre  throughout  this  discussion — -jt  meets  him  at  every  turn  and 
corner  of  his  argument, — well !  The  Greek  word  nduityt  means  rule, 
guide,  govern,  as  well  as  "  feed."  See  Homer, ^«s»j/».  "  nsi/x«n'  xaac" 
was  the  epithet  applied  usually  to  Agamemnon.  Feed  my  lambs  means 
all  the  flock,  with  the  subordinate  pastors  spread  over  the  universal  fold. 
The  evangelist  lakes  care  to  tell  us,  in  the  parable  of  the  temple,  that 
ht  spoke  if  the  temple  of  his  body.  He  explained,  as  St.  John  says,  more 
than  all  the  books  of  the  whole  world  could  contain,  to  his  disciples, 
during  the  forty  days  from  his  resurrection  to  his  ascension,  spent>  as  • 
the  scripture  assures  us,  in  speaking  to  them  of  the  kingdom  of  God, 
as  he  every  where  called  his  church.  Mr.  C.  says  there  is  no  priest 
since  Christ.  I  grant  it,  in  the  sense  that  the  high  priest  holds  the 
place  of  Christ,  derives  his  power  from  Christ.  In  this  sense  Christ 
employs  the  priest  as  his  agent,  and  exercises  by  him  his  own  priest- 
hood, in  which  God  the  Father  hath  (Ps.  109)  confirmed  hiiriby  an  oath 
for  ever.  But  in  the  sense  that  no  such  priest  now  ^xists,  I  cannot  agre«» 
with  the  gentleman,  for  St.  Paul  says,  thirty  years  after  Christ's  ascen- 
sion, "i^(w  every  high  priest  taken  from  among  men,  is  ordained  for  men, 
in  the  things  that  appertain  to  God,  that  he  may  offer  up  gifts  and  sacri- 
fices for  sin.  Who  can  have  compassion  on  them  that  are  ignorant 
and  err,  because  he  himself  also  is  compassed  with  infirmity,  and 
therefore  he  ought,  as  for  the  people  so  also  for  himself,  to  offer  for 
sins;  n'feither  doth  any  man  take  the  honor  to  himself,  but  he  that  is 
called  by  God  as  Aaron  was."  Heb.  ch.  5,  v.  1,  2,  3,  4.  Does  i.ot 
all  this  prove  a  priesthood  distinct  from  the  body  of  christians,  thirty 
years  after  Christ,  as  it  exists  at  present?  Does  not  St.  Paul  say, 
we  have  an  altar  of  which  they  cannot  partake  who  serve  the  tabei- 
nacle  1  Hpb.  vi.  13,  10.  And  what  ^fas  that  altar  for  but  for  the  sacri- 
fices which  the  priests  were  taken  from  among  men  to  offer  1 — [Time 
expired.]  ^ 


134  DEBATE    ON    THE 


TUESDAY,  January  17th,  Half^ast  9  o'clock,    ^.    M.  . 
Mr!  Ca.mi  bell  rises — 

I  intend  if  possible,  to  sum  up  this  argument  on  my  second  propo- 
sition this  furenoon.  I  could  wish  that  my  friend,  the  bishop  M-ould 
reply  to  me  instead  of  anlicipating  propositions  in  advance,  and  of 
reading  or  speaking  of  matters  which  are  wholly  irrelevant.  He  is 
even  now  occasionally  on  my  first  proposition;  anon,  on  'the  second  ; 
and  instantly,  on  subjects  which  we  have  not  agreed  to  debate.  He 
talks  about  my  getting  into  thickets  and  circuitous  labyrinths,  with- 
out seeming  to  perceive  that  I  am  in  pursuit  of  him.  He  makes  pro- 
positions and  assertions  for  me  which  1  never  uttered,  and  spends,  his 
lime  in  descanting  upon  his  own  misapprehensions.* 

I  must  however,  intimate  to  him  and  my  audience,  my  purpose  of 
ceasing  to  respond  to  any  thing  he  may  introduce  not  in  reply  to  my 
speeches.  If  I  must  lead  the  way ;  he  nmst  follow.  I  cannot  be  de- 
coyed into  all  the  minor  and  remote  points  he  may  originate.  I  must 
go  on  to  sustain  my  propositions,  whether  he  respond  to  them  or  not ; 
and  shall  appropriate  half  an  hour  occasionally  to  such  matters  in  his 
speeclies  as  may  call  for  my  notice. 

I  cannot,  therefore  debate  the  priesthood,  or  any  foreign  topic.  But 
as  the  gentleman  has  again  reiterated  the  charge,  ^'feed  my  sAcep," 
and  seems  to  make  the  whole  merits  of  the  question  depend  on  the 
meaning  of  the  word  sheep  ,•  I  will  once  more,  and  I  think  only  once 
more  advert  to  it.  It  is  universally  admitted  by  Protestants  and  Cath- 
olics, that  it  is  the  duty  of  pastors  to  feed  the  JlucA:  of  their  charge. 
If  there  be  a  common  duty  in  the  ministry  of  the  old  and  new  law,  it 
is  this.  But  it  is  essential  to  his  argument  to  make  the  word  jtAx/ioc  sig- 
nifying sheep  denote  clergy.  This  is  an  extraordinary  assumption. 
It  would  be  a  waste  of  time  to  argue  against  it.  But  that  you  may 
see  its  absurdity,  I  will  read  from  the  Catholic  version  a  part  of  the 
1 0th  chap,  of  John,  substituting  the  bishop's  definition  for  the  tenn. 

"  He  that  entereth  not  by  the  door  into  the  lold  of  the  clergij,  but  cliiub- 
eth  up  some  othef  way,  he  is  a  thief  and  a  robber.  But  he  that  entereth  by  the 
door,  is  the  pastor  of  the  clergy.  To  this  min  the  porter  openeth,  and  the  cler- 
gy hear  his  voice ;  and  he  calleth  his  own  clergy  by  name,  and  leadeth  them  forth. 
And  when  he  halh  let  forth  his  own  clergy,  he  gcth  before  them,  and  the 
clergy  follow  him,  because  they  know  his  voici.  I  am  the  door  of  the  clergy. 
And  how  many  soever  have  come  are  thieves  and  robbers,  but  the  clergy  heard 
them  not.  • 

11th  verse.  I  am  the  ^ood  pastor.  The  good  pastor  giveth  his  life  for  his 
clergy.  But  the  hireling  and  he  that  is  not  the  pastor,  whose  own  the  clergy 
are  not,  seeth  the  wolf  coming,  and  leaveth  the  clergy  and  fleeth;  and  the  wolf 
raveneth  and  disperseth  the  clergy.  And  the  hireling  fleeth  because  he  is  a 
hireling;  and  he  hath  no  care  of  the  clergy.  I  am  the  good  pastor,  and  I  know 
mine,  and  mine  know  me.  As  the  Father  knoweth  me,  and  I  know  th.e  Father; 
and  1  yield  my  life  for  my  cZer^.  And  other  c/erg-i/ 1  have  that  are  not  of  this  fold." 

I  submit  this  without  comment  to  the  good  sense  of  my  audience. 

The  gentleman  may  find  it  more  to  his  account,  or  he  is  more  ac- 
customed to  speak  to  the  prejudices  of  that  part  of  the  community 

*  The  other  day  the  bishop  asserted  that  /  affirmed,  the  apostles  wrote  only  to 
Greek  cities'  This  is  not  found  in  my  speeches;  for  it  is  so  gross  an  error  that 
I  could  not  have  uttered  it,  even  in  a  dream.  I  request  tlse  reader  to  examine 
my  speeches  for  my  own  assertions;  for  he  will  frequently  find  the  bisliop  in- 
stead of  meeting  his  opponent,  demolishing  men  of  straw  ot'  his  own  crtatiou. 


ROMAN   CATHOLiC    RELIGION.  135 

who  rely  on  the  authority  of  the  Roman  church  without  asking  ques- 
tions, who  are  told  not  to  think  or  reason  for  themselves ;  but  to  be- 
lieve in  the  church — to  them  he  may  hold  up  his  map  triumphantly. 
The  face  of  Tertullian  or  Irenaeus  on  paper  is  as  good  to  them  as  fen 
arguments.  But  I  speak  to  Protestants  as  well  as  Catholics;  and,- 
therefore,  I  mast  reason,  for  they  are  a  reasoning  population.  I  ex- 
pect them  to  d  jcide  by  evidence,  and  not  by  authority. 

Reference  has  been  made  to  Waddington,  on  the  papal  succession. 
His  words  were  not  correctly  quoted  by  the  gentleman.  His  interpre- 
tation is  rather  an  evasion  of  the  question.  It  is  to  the  succession  it- 
self he  alludes.  He  cannot  make  it  out :  he  acknowledges  he  can- 
not ;  nor  can  any  living  man. 

To  resume  the  history  of  the  schisms.  I  will  read  a  few  extracts 
that  I  have  marked  in  a  chronological  table  of  the  popes,  which  will 
exhibit  a  bird's  eye  glance  of  the  fortunes  of  the  Roman  see,  for  lit- 
tle more  than  a  smgle  century. 

12G1.  Alexander  IV.  dies  June  :^4.  The  holy  see  vacant  3  months  and  3  days. 
The  cardinals  who  proceeded  to  the  election,  not  being  able  to  pitch  on  one 
among  themselves,  chose  Francis,  patriarch  of  Jerusalem,  who  takes  upon 
him  the  name  of  Urban  IV.  and  is  consecrated  Sept.  4. 
1265.  After  a  vacancy  of  four  months,  cai-duial  Guy,  tlie  Gross,  born  in  Provence, 
is  elected  pope,  !■  cb.  5,  and  consecrated  Maich  18,  under  the  name  of  Cle- 
ment IV. 
1268.     Clement  IV.  dies  Oct.  29.     The  holy  see  lies  vacant  for"  two  years,  nma 

months,  and  two  days. 
1271.     The  cardinals  after  a  long  debate-  on  Sept.  1,  by  way  of  compromisal 
elected  Thibald,  arch  deacon  of  Liege,  native  of  Placenzia,  who  was  then  at 
Ptolemais. 

1276.  Gregory  X.  dies  Jan.  10.  Peter  of  Tarentaise,  cardinal  bishop  of  Ostia,  is 
elected  the  21st.  under  the  name  of  Innocent  V.  After  his  death,  which 
happened  June  the  2d.  cardinal  Ottobon,  a  Genoese,  is  elected  in  his  place, 
July  the  12th,  and  takes  upon  him  the  name  of  Adrian  V.  He  dies  at  Viter- 
bo,  Aug.  18.  without  having  been  consecrated.  Twenty-five  days  after, 
cardinal  John  Peter,  the  son  of  Julian,  a  Portuguese,  is  elected  and  consecra- 
ted, Sept.  15,  under  the  name  of  John  XXI. 

1277.  John  XXI.  is  crushed  by  the  fall  of  the  ceiling  of  the  palace  of  Viterbo, 
and  dies  May  the  20th.  Kov.  25,  John  Cojestan  is  elected,  and  takes  the 
name  of  Nicholas  III.  and  consecrated  Dec.  26. 

1280.     Nicholas  dies  Aug.  22.     The  holy  sec  is  vacant  six  months. 

1287.     Honorius  IV.  dies  on  April  5.    The  holy  see  vacant  till  April  of  the  next 

year. 
1292.     Nicholas  dies  on  April  4.     The  holy  see  vacant  two  years  three  months 

and  two  days. 

1304.  The  death  of  Benedict  July  8.  The  holy  see  remained  vacant  till  the 
next  year. 

1305.  Clement  V.  is  chosen  pope  June  5.  He  b  crowned  at  Lyons  Nov.  11, 
and  resides  in  France. 

1328.  Lewis  of  Bavaria  causes  Michael  Corbario  to  be  chosen  anti-pope,  who 
takes  the  name  of  Nicholas  V.  and  is  enthroned  May  12.  He  was  driven 
out  <if  Rome,  Aug.  4. 

S78.  Gregory  XI.  died  March  27th.  The  cardinals  entered  the  conclave  at 
Rome,  April  7th.  The  Romans  required  a  Roman  or  an  Italian  pope.  The 
arch-bishop  of  Paris  is  chosen  inatumultuous  manner,  April  9th, and  crowned 
tlie  17th.  under  the  name  of  Urban  VI.  The  cardinals  fly  into  Anagni^  in 
May,  and  protest  against  the  election  of  Urban.  They  came  to  Rondi 
August  the  27th,  enter  the  conclave,  and  chose,  September  20th,  the  cardi- 
nal of  Geneva,  who  took  the  name  of  Clement  VII.  which  caused  a  schism 
in  the  church. 

1371).  Clement  VIII.  flies  to  Naples,  and  from  thence  goes  to  Avignon,  where 
he  arrived  June  10.  The  competitors  for  the  papa  :y  condemn  one  another. 
Du  Pin.— Vol.  it. 


136  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Touching  all  that  the  gentleman  has  said  or  may  say  of  the  authen- 
ticity of  Du  Pin,  I  observe  that  the  reporters  have  recorded  my  de- 
fence of  his  reputation.  They  will  also  have  stated  the  fact  that  I 
only  quote  him  as  authentic  on  such  matters  as  all  other  historians  tes- 
tify.    I  will  not  then  repeat  the  same  defence  again  and  again. 

I  know,  indeed,  that  what  is  authentic  with  Jansenists  may  be  he- 
terodox with  Jesuits,  and  vice  versa.  When  the  Romanists  are 
hard  pressed,  they  have  no  English  authentic  historians.  And  when 
we  quote  a  Latin  one,  we  are  sure  to  err  in  tho  translation.  Bellar- 
mine  is  repudiated  by  one  party ;  even  Barronius  is  sometimes  disal- 
lowed. Still  being  in  Latin,  he  is  more  authentic  than  any  other. 
We  shall  therefore  take  from  him  a  few  words  in  confirmation  of  what 
wereadfrorh  the  Decretals  of  Du  Pin.  Barronius,  vol.  vi.  p.  5G2,  A.  D. 
498,  tells  us  that  the  emperor's  faction  sustained  the  election  of  Lauren- 
tius  to  the  papacy.  In  this  struggle  "  murders,  robberies  and  numberless 
evils,  were  perpetrated  at  Rome."  Nay  such  were  the  horrible  scenes 
that,  says  Barronius,  "  there  was  a  risk  of  their  destroying  the  whole 
city."  In  the  schism  between  popes  Sylverius  and  Vigilius  in  the 
sixth  century,  the  latter,  though  an  atrociously  wicked  man,  "  impli- 
cated," says  Barronius,  "  in  so  many  crimes"  that  all  virtuous  men 
opposed  him,  was  raised  to  the  papal  chair.  Yet  this  man  was  pro- 
nounced a  good  pope.  Barronius  says  he  is  not  to  be  despised  though 
a  bad  man.  Let  every  man  recollect,  "says  he,  that  even  to  the  sha- 
dow of  Peter,  immense  virtue  was  given  of  God !"  (Bar.  vol.  vii. 
p.  420.) 

'In  the  midst  of  contentions  which  rent  the  Roman  Catholic  church, 
pope  Pelagius  I.  was  chosen.  This  pope  ajtproved  the  council  which 
pope  Vigilius  had  condemned.  This  increased  the  flames  of  eccle- 
siastical ^ar  to  such  a  degree  that  the  pope  could  not  find  a  bishop  of 
Rome,  who  could  consecrate  him;  and  he  was  constrained  to  beg  a 
bishoppf  Ostium  to  do  this  service;  "a  thing,"  says  Barronius,  "which 
never  had  occurred  before."     (Vol.  vii.  p.  475.) 

The  popes  Formosus  and  Stephen  lived  in  the  ninth  century.  The 
latter,  sa)'^s  Barronius,  was  so  wicked,  that  he  would  not  have  dared 
to  enroll  him  in  the  list  of  popes,  were  it  not  that  antiquity  gives  his 
name.  In  the  exercise  of  papal  infallibility,  he  not  only  rescinded 
the  acts  and  decrees  of  his  infallible  predecessor  Formosus;  but  collec-  " 
ting  a  council  of  cardinals  and  bishops  as  bad  as  himself,  he  actually 
had  the  old  pope  taken  out  of  his  grave;  and  he  brought  him  into 
court,  tried,  and  condemned  him;  cut  oflT  three  of  his  fingers;  and 
plunged  his  remains  into  the  Tiber.  See  Platina's  life  of  Stephen 
Vl.  and  Barronius  do.' 

'Barronius  under  the  year  1004,  names  three  rival  popes,  who  per- 
petrated the  most  shameful  cjimes,  and  bartered  the  papacy,  and  sold 
tt  for  gold.  He,  though  a  Roman  Catholic  writer,  calls  them  Cerber- 
us, the  three  headed  beast  which  had  issued  from  the  gates  of 
hell !' 

Hear  his  words  in  his  life  of  pope  Stephen  VII.  A.  D.  900.  '  The 
case  is  such,  that  scarcely  any  one  can  believe  it,  unless  he  sees  it 
with  his  eyes,  and  handles  it  with  his  hands,  viz.  what  unworthy, 
vile,  unsightly,  yea,  execrable  and  hateful  things  the  sacred  apostolic 
see,  on  whose  hinges  the  universal  apostolical  church  turns,  has  been 
compelled  to  see,  &c.' 

'  Genbreird  in  his  chronicles,  under  the  year  904  says,  "  for  nearly 


HOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  137 

150  years,  about  fifty  popes  deserted  wholly  the  virtue  of  their  predeces- 
sors, being  apostate  rather  than  apostolical  !' 

'And  to  crown  the  climax,  Barronius,  under  the  year  912  adds : 
"  What  is  then  the  face  of  the  holy  Roman  church  !  How  exceed- 
ingly foul  it  is !  When  most  potent,  sordid  and  abandoned  women, 
(Meretices,)  ruled  at  Rome:  at  whose  will  the  sees  were  changed; 
bishops  were  presented  ;  and  what  is  horrid  to  hear,  and  unutterable, 
False  Pontiffs,  the  paramours  of  these  women,  were  intruded  into 
the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  &c."  He  adds, — ♦'  For  who  can  eiffirm  that 
men  illegally  intruded  by  bad  women,  (scortis)  were  Roman  pontiffs  !" 
Again  :  "  The  canons  were  closed  in  silence ;  the  decrees  of  pontiffs 
were  suppressed  :  the  ancient  traditions  were  proscribed ;  and  the  sa- 
cred ceremonies  and  usages  of  former  days  were  wholly  extinct. 
See  his  Annals  A.  D.  912.'* 

Again :  he  relates  that  pope  Alexander  was  elected  by  cardinals, 
some  of  whom  were  bribed,  some  allured  by  promises  of  promotion, 
and  some  enticed  by  fellowship  in  his  vices  and  impurities  to  give 
him  their  suffrages.  He  refers  to  various  authors  who  complained 
that  he  was  famous  for  his  debauchery ;  he  tells  us  of  his  vile  exam- 
ple in  keepmg  a  Roman  strumpet  Vanozia,  by  whom  he  had  many 
children ;  that  he  conferred  wealth  and  honors  on  them,  and  even  cre- 
ated one  of  them,  Caesar  Borgia  (an  inordinately  wicked  man)  arch- 
bishop of  the  church.    Vid.  Bar.  Annals,  vol.  xix.  p.  413  et  seq. 

'  The  same  writer  (vol.  ix.  p.  145)  records  the  election  of  Bene- 
dict IX.  at  the  age  of  twelve  years,  which  he  says  was  accom- 
plished by  gold,  and  he  calls  it  ("  horrendum  ac  detestabile  visu") 
"  horrible  and  detestable  to  behold ;"  and  yet  he  adds  that  the  whole 
christian  world  acknowledged  Benedict,  without  controversy,  to  be  a 
true  pope ! 

Stephen  vii.  The  unparalleled  wickedness  of  this  pope  i*  conveyed  in  a  sin- 
o;le  line  :  [/fa  quidem  passusjlicinorus  homo  quique  utfur  et  lairo  ingressua  est 
»n  ovile  ovium,  laqueo  vitam.  adeo  in/ami  exitu  vindice  Deo  clausit."]  "  Thus  per- 
ished this  villanous  man,  who  entered  the  sheepfold  as  a  thief  and  a  robber;  and 
who  in  the  retribution  of  God,  ended  iiis  days  by  the  infamous  death  of  the  hal- 
ter."    (l?ar.  vol.  X.  p.  742.) 

Again,  Barronius  says  of  the  10th  century : 

"  What  then  was  the  face  of  the  Roman  church  ?  .  How  very  filthy,  when  the 
most  powerful  and  sordid  harlots  then  ruled  at  Rome,  at  whose  pleasure  seea 
were  changed  and  bishoprics  were  given,  and — which  is  horrible  to  hear,  and 
most  abommable — \he\r  gallants  were  obtruded  into  the  see  of  Peter,  and  made 
false  popes ;  for  who  can  say  they  could  be  lawful  popes,  who  were  intruded  bj 
such  harlots  without  law  ?  There  was  no  mention  of  the  election  or  consent 
of  clergy;  the  canons  were  silent,  the  decrees  of  popes  suppressed,  the  ancient 
traditions  proscribed, — lust  armed  with  the  secular  power,  challeaged  all 
things   to   itself. 

What  kind  of  Cardinals,  do  you  imagine  must  .then  be  chosen  by  those  mon- 
sters, when  nothing  is  so  natural  as  for  like  to  beget  like  ?  who  can  doubt,  but  they 
in  all  things  did  consent  to  those  that  chose  them  ?  Who  will  not  easilv  believe 
that  they  animated  them  and  followed  their  footsteps  ?  Who  understands  not, 
jlhat  such  men  must  wish  that  our  Lord  would  have  slept  continually,  and  never 
have  awoke  to  judgment  to  take  cognizance  of,  and  punish  their  iniquities."  Ann. 
Vo).x.912 

Now  if  the  gentleman  objects  to  any  of  these  quotations  which  I' 
have  hastily,  but  I  believe  most  correctly  made :  the  originals  are 

*   Browulee'a  Letters  on  Rom.  C'th.  controversy,  pp.  36,  37,38. 
m3  18 


138  DEBATE    ON    THE 

here  and  let  them  be  examined  :  For,  these  being  admitted  it  is  use* 
less  to  object  to  Du  Pin,  who  never  uses  so  severe  language  against 
the  popes  as  Baronius  and  Genebrand",  Platina  and  others. 

Finally  on  this  subject.  For  seventy  years,  there  was  no  pope  in 
Rome,  besides  all  the  other  interregnums.  The  pope  resided  at  Avig- 
non in  France  and  left  St.  Peter's  chair  empty.  For  almost  half  a 
century  there  were  two  popes,  and  two  lines  of  popes  existing  at  one 
time — one  reigning  in  Italy,  and  one  in  France.  And  at  last  there 
were  three  popes — Benedict  XIII.  the  Spanish  pope,  Gregory  XII.  the 
French  pope,  and  John  XXIII.  the  Italian  pope.  Then  the  cpuncil  of 
Constance  met — A.  D.  1414,  and  made  a  fourth,  or  true  pope,  and  depos- 
ed the  three  anti-popes.  Such  was  the  *29th  schism  in  the  papacy  !  la 
there, — may  I  not  ask  with  all  these  facts  before  us, — Is  there  any 
man  on  earth  that  can  have  the  least  confidence  in  any  pope  as  the 
successor  of  Peter  !  A  thousand  questions  the  most  learned  and  in- 
tricate, which  no  living  bishop  has  time  or  means  to  examine,  must 
be  decided  before  he  could  rationally  or  religiously  believe  that  the 
succession  from  Peter  has  any  existence  at  all :  or,  in  truth,  it  cannot 
be  believed  but  upon  mere  authority ! 

We  now  proceed  to  show  that  there  has  been  no  fixed  and  uniform 
method  of  electing  the  popes.  Indeed  history  and  tradition  furnish 
us  with  no  less  than  seven  different  methods. 

1.  Irenaeus.  says,  'that  tradition  said,  that  Peter  appointed  his  suc^ 
cessor.'  And  if  he  did,  why  do  not  all  the  popes  follow  his  exam 
pie  ?  for  Irenasus  is  as  good  authority  for  this,  as  for  that  concerning 
the  founding  of  the  church  of  Rome. 

2.  The  priests  and  people  are  said  to  have  often  elected  the  first 
popes ;  oTr,  rather  the  bishops  nominated  and  the  people  elected. — I 
ought  to  have  observed  distinctly,  that  there  is  as  much  sophistry  in 
the  word  pope  as  ever  was  played  off  on  earth.  The  word  pope,  in 
the  east  was  first  applied  to  all  bishops,  and  is  so  used  in  Russia  to 
this  day.  It  was  in  the  5th  century  applied  to  the  senior  bishops  and 
metropolitans  of  the  west.  But  it  was  not  until  the  time  of  Gregory 
VII.  that  it  was  exclusively  appropriated  by  his  own  innovation,  to  the 
bishops  of  Rome. 

Hence,  in  this  variety  of  acceptation,  popes  many  were  always  in 
the  church,  and  were  elected  by  the  people.  But  the  persons  first 
called  popes  and  those  now  wearing  the  title,  have  no^other  resem- 
blance than  the  common,  name. 

3.  The  emperors  nominated  and  bishops  elected,  and  the  emperom 
ppointed  on  their  own  responsibility. 

4.  Leo  VIII.  transferred  the  whole  power  of  choosing  the  pope  to 
the  emperor,  being  tired  with  the  inconstancy  of  the  Romans. 

5.  Barronius  in  his  Annals,  112,  8,  and  sect.  141,  1,  says,  '  They 
(the  popes)  were  introduced  by  powerful  men  and  women.  //  was 
frequently  the  price  of  prostitution  P 

6.  By  the  decree  of  pope  Nicholas  II.  in  his  Laeteran  Synod  :  '  The 
whole  business  was  given  over  to  the  cardinals,  an  order  of  men,  not 
heard  of  for  1000  years  after  Christ.  The  popes  n-w  make  the 
cardinals,  and  the  cardinals  make  the  pope.  What  a  glorious  repub- 
lic !  My  friend,  a  staunch  republican,  agrees  tliat  a  few  men  in 
Rom.e  should  elect  a  head  for  the  universal  church  !   But  sometimes— 

7.  General  councils  (as  that  of  Constance,  Pisa  and  Basil)  took 
upon  themselves  the  making  of  popes,  and,  as  we  have  seen,  made  a 


HOMAN   CATHOLIC    RKLIGION.  139 

fourth  pope,  vflien  there  were  already  three  acknowledged  by  different 
parts  of  the  church.  Can  the.se  facts  be  denied  ?  They  cannot  and 
I  presume,  w^ill  not.  * 

It  is  now  affirmed  that  the  intrigues  of  papal  elections  incompara- 
bly surpass  the  intrigues  of  any  court  on  earth.  The  politics  of 
France,  of  Italy,  of  Austria,  are  so  incorporated  with  the  schemes  of 
the  cardinals,  or  so  bias  or  bribe  them,  that  on  the  election  of  a  pope, 
it  is  usually  said,  "  Austria  has  succeeded"  or  "  Spain,"  or  "  France 
kas  prevailed  this  time !"  In  one  word,  the  papal  chair  is  the  most 
corrupt  and  corrupting  institution,  that  ever  stood  on  earth.  The  Ro- 
man Cesars,  or  the  Egyptian  dynasties,  were  pure  and  incorrupt,  com- 
pared with  this  mammoth  scheme  of  iniquity.  On  the  whole  premi- 
ses, I  ask,  would  the  head  of  the  church  so  jeopardize  all  the  interests 
of  his  kingdom  as  to  make  the  popes  of  Rome,  or  faith  in  them  es- 
sential elements  of  his  system  of  redemption,  or  necessary  to  the  sal- 
vation of  any  human  being]  !^ 

To  recapitulate. — This  being  a  fundamental  and  primary  essential 
element  of  the  Roman  church,  I  have  labored  it  more  than  any  other 
and  yet  I  have  not  said  a  tithe  of  what  may  be  said,  or  even  what  I 
have  to  say  on  the  subject.  But  I  have  aimed  at  establishing  four  points 
in  demonstrating  this  proposition.  And  to  adopt  the  positive  and 
dogmatic  style  of  my  learned  opponent,  may  I.  not  say  that  /  have 
fully  proved- — 

1.  That  the  office  of  pope,  or  supreme  head  on  earth,  has  no  scrip- 
ture warrant  or  authority  whatever.  Indeed,  that  the  whole  beau  ideal 
of  a  church  of  nations,*  with  a  monarchical  head,  (which,  in  the  es- 
timation of  the  bishop,  is  equivalent  to  the  word  church  of  Christ,)  is  as 
gratuitous  an  assumption  as  ever  graced  a  romance,  ancient  or  niodern.— 

2.  That  it  cannot  be  ascertained  that  Peter  was  ever  bishop  of  Rome 
— nay,  indeed,  it  has  been  shown,  that  it  is  wholly  contrary  to  the 
New  Testament  history,  and  incompatible  with  his  office. — 

3.  That  Christ  gave  no  law  of  succession. — 

4.  That  if  he  had,  that  succession  has  been  destroyed  by  a  long 
continuance  of  the  greatest  monsters  of  crime  that  ever  lived ;  and  by 
cabals,  intrigues,  violence,  envy,  lust,  and  schisms,  so  that  i>o  man  can 
believe  that  one  drop  of  apostolic  grace  is  either  in  the  person  or  office 
of  Gregory  XVI.  the  present  nominal  incumbent  of  Peter's  chair! 
It  would  be  now  as  easy  to  prove  that  Solomon's  mosque  built  by  the 
Turks,  is  Solomon's  temple,  in  which  Jesus  Christ  stood ;  as  that  the 
popes  or  church  of  Rome  is  a  christian  institution. 

On  what,  now,  rests  Roman  Catholicism  1 !  If  the  foundation  be 
destroyed,  how  can  the  building  stand  ?  I  need  not  tell  my  opponent 
that  this  is  a  blow  at  the  root  of  his  apostolic  tree.  He  feels  it,  and 
I  am  glad  to  think  that  if  any  American  bishop  can  sustain  these  pre- 
tensions, my  learned  opponent  is  that  man.  He  has  asked,  and  he 
may  again  ask,  where  was  the  Protestant  church  before  Luther's  timel 
In  reply,  I  ask,  where  was  the  pope  before  Constantine's  time] 
He  brought  Mosheim  to  offset  Waddington  and  Jones  on  the  subject 
of  the  Novatians.  And  what  did  Mosheim  prove  contrary  to  these 
historians '?  You  have  heard  with  what  success  my  opponent  seeks 
to  tarnish  the  reputation  of  Novatians,  Waldenses  and  Protestants. 
As  a  general  offset  to  all  his  declamation  on  this  subject,  I  will^ive 
you  the  testimony  of  a  s:ood  Roman  Catholic  :  for  he  was  an  Inquisitor 
—I  mean  Hienerius  Saccho,  one  of  the  most  inveterate  enemies  of 


i40  DEBATE   ON   THE 

these  old  fashioned  Protestants.    I  have  the  original  hefore  me,  but 
shall  not  read  it  unless  it  be  required  :  The  translation  reads , 

"  Anion^  all  the  sects"  (there  were  sectsf  you  peiceive,  before  tlie  Reforma- 
tion) "  which  still  are,  orhave  been,  there  is  not  one  more  pernicious  to  the  church 
than  that  of  the  Leonites;"  (a  name  by  which  the  Walclenses  were  sometime* 
called,)  "  and  that  for  three  reasons.  The  1st  is,  because  it  is  the  oldest,  for 
some  say  it  hath  existed  from  the  time  of  pope  Sylvester;  othersfrom  the  time 
of  the  Apostles.  The  2nd,  because  it  is  more  general,  for  there  is  scarce  any 
country  where  this  sect  is  not.  The  3rd,  because  when  all  others  sects  beget 
horror  by  their  blasphemies  against  God,  this  of  the  Leoni'es  hath  a  f^reat  show 
of  piety  because  they  Vive  justly  before  men,  and  believe  all  </ii/iir*  rightly  con- 
eming  God  and  all  the  articles  contained  in  the  creed.  Only  they  blas- 
heined  the  church  of  Rome."  Rein.  Sanho.  edit.  Grilzer,  O.  S.  J.  cap.  A. 
page  54. 

I  could  give  much  more  Roman  Catholic  testimony  in  proof  that  the 
doctrines  of  Protestantism  continued  from  the  days  of  the  first  Roman 
schism  till  now :  but  this  at  present  would  seem  superfluous.  Nor 
will  I  speak  now  of  the  old  English  and  Irish  churches  which  the 
Roman  bishops  sought  in  vain  for  many  centuries  to  bring  into  their 
fold.  There  is  nothing  betrays  a  less  discriminating  regard  to  the 
facts  of  ecclesiastical  history,  than  to  ask  where  was  the  church  be- 
fore the  days  of  Luther  1 — But  I  hasten  to  the  point  yet  before  me, 
which,  like  some  others,  I  may  not  remember,  was  reserved  for  a  more 
convenient  season.  It  was  an  objection  drawn  in  part  from  Eph.  iv. 
11,  and  from  the  alleged  difficulty  of  obtaining  a  ministry  but 
through  the  popes  of  Rome. 

This  passage,  viewed  in  common  with  Matth.  xxviii.  18, 19,  seems  to 
me,  rather  to  remove  all  difficulty  on  the  subject.  Matth.  xxviii.  gives 
all  authority  to  the  apostles  to  set  up  the  christian  church,  and  pro- 
mises them  miraculous  aid,  till  the  work  was  done.  "  I  am  with  you 
continually  till  the  conclusion  of  this  state — itei;  m;  a-wrikvat  tou  aiiZ)/o(.  Of 
which  I  must  here  speak  more  particularly.  At  present  it  suffices  to 
repeat  the  fact  of  such  a  commission,  and  such  a  promise  to  the 
apostles. 

Now  let  us  hear  Paul.  When  Christ  ascended,  "  he  gave  gifts  to 
men." — What,  let  me  ask,  were  they "?  "  He  gave  apostles,  prophets, 
evangelists,  pastors,  and  teachers" — all  miraculously  endowed.  They 
were  not  raised  up,  out  of  the  church  ;  but  given  directly  from  heaven 
to  the  church,  or  for  building  a  church!  What,  again,  let. me  ask 
Paul,  were  they  given  for  1  "  For  the  perfecting  of  the  saints  :"  or, 
according  to  the  Douay  bible,  "  for  the  consummation  of  the  saints 
unto  the  work  of  the  ministry,  unto  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ." 
And  for  how  long,  let  me  ask,  still  more  empnatically  ?  "  Until"  (it 
is  Mtxi'  i"  Greek,  donee  in  Latin,  adverbs  expressive  of  the  time  how 
long)  "  Until  we  all  come  into  the  unity  of  the  faith  and  knowledge 
of  the  Son  of  God,  to  a  perfect  man'^  (not  men — that  is,  to  a  perfect 
body)  "  into  the  measure  of  the  age  of  the  fulness  of  Christ."— =-The 
Roman  church  being  judge,  then,  these  officers  were  given  to  the  church 
after  the  ascension,  for  a  special  work,  and  for  a  limited  time. — Till, 
out  of  Jews  and  Gentiles,  they  had  made  one  perfect  man,  or  church. 

Now,  these  apostles  acted  in  exact  accordance  with  the  nature  of 
the  case.  They  preached,  baptized,  and  congregated  disciples,  in 
parUcular  places.  These  disciples  had,  from  the  nature  of  the  case, 
to  recfeive  from  them  the  whole  christian  instiliilion.  They  knew 
neither  what  to  believe  or  do,  but  as  they  were  taught  by  these  in- 
spired men. — Hence,  the  apostles  preached,  baptized,  taught,  serve*. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    »EL  GION.  141 

tables,  and  dispensed  all  ordinances,  and  performed  all  offices  among 
them,  till  the  body  of  the  church  had  learned  its  duty.  Then  they 
taught  them  to  select  from  among  themselves  certain  officers — gave 
them  the  qualifications,  and  showed  them  in  their  own  persons  how 
they  were  to  be  set  apart  and  ordained  to  these  offices. — For  example 
the  deacons,  or  public  servants  of  the  church  of  Jerusalem,  the  mother 
church.     Again,  they  taught  them  "to  seftd  out  missionaries  or  evan- 

felists,  as  in  the  church  of  Antioch ;  and  finally,  to  ordain  elders  or 
isiiops  over  the  flock,  as  soon  as  they  had  persons  qualified  for  that 
offi'^.e. — They  taught  the  church,  then,  to  have  bishops  and  deacons, 
and  evanirelists  (or  general  missionaries,  as  the  case  may  be).  They 
gave  the  law,  the  qualifications,  and  the  mode  of  inducting  them  into 
office.  They  never  taught  any  one  church  to  depend  always  upon 
Jerusalem,  or  Antioch,  or  Rome,  or  Corinth ;  but  they  taught  the  ne- 
cessity of  all  these  offices — gave  the  qualifications  of  the  officers,  and 
assisted  in  ordaining  them  in  many  particular  congregations,  of  which 
congregations  with  the  same  laws,  authority,  and  order,  there  never 
have  been  wanting  thousands  fropi  that  day  till  now. 

Order  has  its  foundation  in  nature.  The  highest  officers  were  call- 
ed seniors  or  elders ;  because  of  their  age ;  and  bishops  or  overseers, 
because  of  their  office.  Deacons,  not  having  so  much  authority  and 
glory,  and  not  having  a  salary,  like  bishops,  there  never  has  been 
among  them  any  controversy  about  succession !  But  had  there  been 
any  great  honor  or  reward  in  that  office,  we  should  doubtless  have  had 
as  much  ado  about  an  unbroken  line ;  and  could  as  easily  find  one  in 
this  case  as  in  that  of  the  bishops  of  Rome,  or  Constantinople.  The 
same  order  obtained  in  the  christian  church — I  mean,  substantially, 
that  obtained  in  the  synagogues  of  the  Jews.  The  same  word 
TTfta-^urui'.v  or  presbytery,  is  found  in  the  New  Testament  in  reference 
to  both  the  synagogue  and  ihe  church.  "  Stir  up  the  gift,"  office  "  th  it 
is.iii  thee,-  by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery."  Indeed, 
the  synagogue,  much  more  than  the  tabernacle  or  temple,  was  the 
archetype  of  the  order,  which  Ihe  apostles  set  up.  In  every  case  the 
question  was  put  to  the  people,  "  Look  out,  choose  out,  select  from 
among  j' ourselves,"  &c. 

My  friend  is  almost  a  Protestant  on  some  points.  He  occasionally 
recommends  the  bible  to  his  flock,  and  he  says  that  the  ordinances  of 
religion  do  not  receive  their  virtue  from  an  unholy  or  holy  pope — that 
he  has- his  authority  to  administer  from  Christ  rather  than  from  the 
pope. 

Indeed,  I  know  not  why  the  spirit  of  God  should  be  promiscJ 
through  such  a  wretched  and  polluted  channel  as  the  popes  of  Rome, 
rather  than  to  operate  from  heaven  in  all  its  holy  influences  upon  those, 
who  by  its  appointment,  are  chosen  and  ordained  by  prayer,  fasting, 
and  imposition  of  hands,  as  deacons  or  bishops  of  the  christian  con- 
gregations. We  lose  nothing  then,  in  abandoning  the  leaky  and 
sinking  ship  of  pontifical  authority  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church. — 
[Time  expired.] 

Half-past    10  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Bishop  Purcki.l  rises — 

My  friend  has  set  me  the  example  of  recapitulating.  I  shall  not 
fail  to  do  so  in  due  time.  He  has  talked  around  one  of  the  invincible 
texts  of  Scripture  which  I  had  adduced  for  Peter's  headship  :  "  Simon 


142  DEBATE   ON   THK 

Simon,  behold  Satan  hath  desired  to  have  you,  (the  plural)  that  he 
may  sift  you  as  wheat :  but  I  have  prayed  for  thee,  that  thy  faith 
fail  not;  and  thou,  being  converted,  confirm  thy  brethren."  St.  Luke 
xxii.  32.  And  he  orratnitously  asserts  that  "  Confirm"  here  means  only 
"  Comfort."  But  will  any  man  say  that  such  an  interpretation  has 
weakened  the  force  of  my  argument  from  the  text,  or  destroyed  the 
avowed  effect  and  object  of  the  Savior's  prayer,  namely  that  the  faith 
of  Peter  should  never  fail,  and  that,  in  it,  he  should  confirm  his  bre- 
thren ■?  Let  him  shew  that  Christ  addressed  a  special  prayer,  for  any 
similar  purpose,  in  favor  of  all,  or  of  any  of  the  other  apostles,  and 
then  he  may  summon  Christ's  appointed  chief  of  the  apostolic  band, 
to  surrender  his  preeminence.  If  he  cannot  do  this,  Peter  must  for 
ever  retain  his  supremacy — not  of  age,  nor  of  talents,  nor  of  priority 
of  call,  nor  of  conversion,  but  of  office. 

He  again  asserts,  for  Mr.  G.  seems  to  think. we  must  grant  every 
thing  to  his  assertions,  that  I  cannot  find  a  solitary  proof  in  Irenmus, 
or  in  any  other  author  of  christian  antiquity,  that  Peter  was  ever  bish- 
op of  Rome.  Now  in  p.  169  of  this  Protestant  edition  of  Irenaus 
we  find  that  warrant.  It  is  in  chap.  I.  book  3,  "  against  heresies." 
He  speaks  as  follows  : 

"  For  we  have  not  learned  the  disposition,  or  economy,  of  our  salvation  fiora 
any  others  than  those  throug-h  whom  the  gospel  came  unto  us,  which,  indeed 
they  first  preached,  and  afterwards,  by  the  will  of  God,  delivered  to  us  in  writ- 
ing, to  be  the  pillar  and  ground  of  our  faith.  Nor  is  it  lawful  to  say,  as  some 
do,  who  pretend  to  correct  the  apostles,  that  they  preached  belbre  they  had  had 
perfect  knowledge.  For  after  the  Lord  had  arisen  from  the  dead,  they  were 
clothed  with  virtue  from  on  high  bv  the  Holy  Spirit  who  came  down  upon  them, 
and  they  were  filled  with  all  knowledge  and  attained  to  perfect  understanding; 
they  went  to  the  ends  of  the  earth  announcing  to  us  the  good  things  which  are 
from  God,  and  proclaiming  heavenly  peace  to  men,  having  both  all  and  each  of 
th(  m  the  gospel  of  God.  Thus  iVIatthew,  in  their  own  language,  wrote  the 
gospel  scripture  in  Hebrew,  while  Peter  and  Paul  were  evangelizing  and  found- 
ing the  church  of  Rome.  After  their  departure,  Mark,  a  disciple,  and  Peter's 
tn/erpre/er,  likewise  announced  to  us  the  prescribed  doctrines:  next  John,  the 
disciple  of  the  Lord,  who  also  reposed  on  h]p  breast,  published  likewise  a  gospel 
residing  at  Ephesus,  in  Asia.  And  all  these  delivered  to  us  the  doctrine  of  One 
God,  the  Creator  of  heaven  and  earth,  announced  by  the  Lord  and  the  prophets, 
and  one  Christ,  the  Son  of  God;  to  whom,  he  who  assenteth  not,  despiseth  the 
partakers  of  the  Lord,  despiseth  Christ  the  Lord,  despiseth  the  Father,  and  is 
condemned  b}'  himself,  for  he  resisteth  and  opposeth  his  own  salvation,  which 
all  heretics  do." 

Tracing  the  succession  of  bishops  in  the  same  chair,  he  always  make  Peter  the 
first  bishop,  as  I  have  already  sliewn  from  the  very  next  page — 170,  o{  this 
volume. 

There  is  Irenseus,  a  writer  of  the  2d  century — year  150.  I  shall 
ollow  the  devious  track  of  the  gentleman  as  well  as  I  can. 

My  friend  denied  that  I  could  adduce  a  solitary  testimony  to  prove 
that  the  legate  of  the  pope  presided  over  the  first  great  general  coun- 
cil of  the  church,  after  the  council  at  Jerusalem.  Now  I  am  going 
to  adduce  Baronius,  p.  295,  year  of  Christ  325,  year  of  Sylvester  12, 
Constantine  20  :  (how  faithftil  and  exact  our  Catholic  histories  are !) 

"  Belore  we  proceed  to  narrate  the  history  of  the  acts  of  the  Aicene  council, 
I  pray  you,  friendly  reader,  to  pause  with  me,  to  notice  the  most  eminent  prelates 
of  that  illustrious  company  of  saints,  that  most  llowery  crown  of  fathers,  and  most 
distinguished  assemblage  of  holy  bishops,  whose  names  shine  forth  from  amidst 
the  obscurity  of  so  ancient  a  period.  He  who  first  attracts  our  attention,  con- 
spicuous for  having  been  twice  legate,  is  Osius,  bishop  of  Cordova,  in  Spain,  "If- 
presenting  the  bisiiops  of  Spain,  and,  as  we  have  already  said,  holding  tlie  place 
(the  Latin  is  still  stronger — personau  gerens — personating)  Sylvester,  bishop  oi 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGI05.  143 

Rome,  and  chief  of  the  legates,  his  colleagues.  Now,  continues  Baronius,  what- 
good  fjround  could  there  have  been  for  Osius'  signinf;  before  his  colleagues,  the 
legates,  before  the  bishops  of  the  second  and  third  sees  of  the  christian  \Torld, 
Tiz.  Alexandria  and  Antioch,  and  betore  Ciecilian,  the  primate  of  all  Africa,  not 
to  speak  of  others,  qnless  he  held  the  place  and  represented  the  person  of  the 
highest  po»V€r  of  all?  He  then  quotes  the  commencement  of  the  letter  which 
the  legates,  immediately  after  the  council,  addressed  to  the  pope:  "To  Sylvcs- 

.  _  ■         ■  ■     ■        ill  n 


Baronius. 

Nat.  Alex,  says,  vol.  vii.  p.  68,  "The  synod  of  Nice,  first  of  the  cecumeniraU, 
was  convoked  by  the  emperor  Constantine,  with  consent  of  the  Roman  pontiff,  Syl- 
vester— the  president  of  the  council,  in  the  name  of  St.  Sylvester,  and  his  le 
gates  were  Osius,  bishop  of  Cordova.  Vitus  or  Vito.and  Vincentius,  rriests,"  <^t.&c. 

It  was  the  custom  of  the  bishop  of  Rome  to  send  a  bishop  and  two 
inferior  ecclesiastics  to  represent  him  in  the  councils.  Osius  was 
legate  and  Victor  and  Vincentius  were  his  two  assistants. 

Natalis  Alexander  says  the  same,  p.  G8, 7  vol.  Fleury,  another  most 
authentic  historian,  a  man  of  prodigious  learning,  a  contemporary  of  Bos- 
Buet,  and  one  who  has  been  very  severe  against  the  popes,  so  that  we 
have  quarreled  with  him  for  it,  says  the  same,  p.  107  and  108.  He  adds : 

"St.  Atiianasius  says  that  Osius  presided  at  all  the  council?,  and  it  is  certain 
that  he  presided  at  the  council  of  Sardica,  twenty  two  years  later." 

Now  we  cannot  see  why  a  simple  bishop  of  Cordova  should  have  presided, 
by  any  right  of  his,  over  all  the  bish9ps  of  the  world,  even  those  of  Alexandria- 
and  Antioch,  who  were  present  in  person — Gelasius  of  Cyzicum  says  expressly 
that  Osius  held  the  place  of  Sylvester,  bishop  of  imperial  Rome,  with  the  priests 
Victor  (or  Vito,  as  he  was  also  called)  and  V  incentins:  and  his  testimony  should 
not  be  suspected,  as  he  was  a  Greek  and  writing  the  acts  and  records  of  Greeks. 
Subsequent  usage  it  conformable  to  what  is  here  observed. — In  the  (ecumenical 
councils  whose  sftts  have  come  down  to  us,  we  see  the  papal  legates  at  the  head, 
and  thvy  are  commonly,  a  bishop  and  two  priests." 

Here  are  Baronius,  Noel  Alexander,  Fleury. — The  gentleman  says 
that  I  deal  in  rhetoric,  but  he  may  say  what  he  pleases  ;  I  deal  in 
nothing  but  stubborn  facts.  These  are  the  irresistible  arguments  by 
which  Catholic  truth  is  upheld. 

As  for  Peter's  executing  the  decrees  of  the  council  of  Jerusalem, 
I  said  no  such  thing.  He  acted  with  the  rest — but  he  did,  1  main- 
tain, lead,  and  his  authority  was  wanting  to  give  sanction  to  every 
decree.  When  he  spoke,  the  "  muck  disputing''^  ceased.  He  spoke 
humbly,  but  authoritatively.  James  and  Paul  and  Barnabas  acquiesced. 
The  opposition  to  his  gtntilhing  was  wrong  and  much  in  the  spirit  of 
more  modern  opposition,  but  Peter's  authority  then  as  it  has  ever  done 
prevailed  ;  for  if  any  thing  is  certain  in  historical  testimony,  it  is  proved 
that  his  authority  was  acknowledged  to  reside,  in  ancient  days,  in 
his  successors.  So  is  it  now  acknowledged.  We  were  referred  to 
10.  John,  where  Christ  sjJfeaks  of  the  fold  and  the  sheep ;  and  ob- 
jections were  made  to  my  interpretation  of  the  words  "  lambs"  and 
"  sheep,"  as  contradictory  and  absurd.  But  now  mark,  my  friends, 
the  signal  difference  between  the  two  passages.  In  10.  John,  the 
Savior  speaks  of  sheep  alone.  He  says  the  sheep  are  scattered,  and 
never  mentions  lambs.  When  therefore  Christ  says  in  the  other  pas- 
sage, feed  my  lambs,  do  we  not  remark  that  he  afterwards  changes 
the  passage  and  says,  feed  my  sheep  !  and  as  I  observed  yesterday 
Christ  means  pastors,  by  the  sheep  whom  the  lambs,  follow. 
Wide  as  the  world,  is  Christ's  fold — and  there  are  over  its  va- 
rious provinces,  or  pastures,  many  shepherds,  but  one   above   the 


144  DEBATE    ON    THE 

rest,  whose  duty  it  is  to  watch  over  them  all,  to  see  they  do  their  duty. 
—This  is  Peter,  this  is  reasonable,  it  is  as  it  ought  to  be.  Thus,  thp 
rock,  the  keys,  the  charge  to  confirm  his  brethren,  the  acknowledge 
ment  of  Paul  that  he  went  to  see  Peter,  lest  he  might  have  run  in  vain» 
the  acknowledgment  of  the  authority  of  Peter's  successors,  the  very 
necessity  of  such  an  office  to  keep  order,  &c.  All  this  is  proof  positive 
from  scripture  and  history  and  reason,  of  the  supremacy  of  the  chair 
of  Peter,  and  not  rhetoric — or  if  so,  it  is  logical  rhetoric.  Let  not 
scripture,  historj'  and  reason  be  thus  dismissed  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, with  a  wave  of  the  hand. 

That  eternal  Du  Pin,  my  friends,  you  have  had  my  reasons  against 
his  authenticity  as  a  Catholic  historian:  certainly  he  is  no  testimony 
against  the  Catholics.  All  my  friend  can  adduce  to  prove  that  the  au- 
thenticity of  Du  Pin  was  ever  recognized  in  this  country,  is  that  some 
Catholic  paper  in  Kentucky,  as  he  says,  allows  his  authenticity — 
Who  the  editor  of  this  paper  is,  I  know  not.  He  may  be  a  respectable 
Catholic.  The  bishop  of  Bardstown  has  nothing  to  do  with  it,  the 
editor  is  liable  to  be  deceived.  His  opinion  ought  to  have  no  weight 
whatsoever  in  this  controversy. 

What  led  my  friend  into  such  an  error  respecting  the  book  itself, 
was,  probably  his  seeing  prefixed  to  it  the  censor's  license  for  its  im- 
pression ;  but  he  should  have  known  that  the  king  of  France  appoints 
such  persons  as  he  thinks  fit,  to  examine  whether  publications  con- 
tain any  thing  dangerous  to  the  state.  And  Louis  Philip  is  more 
strict  in  this  respect  than  ever  Charles  X.  was,  who  was  exiled 
from  France  for  the  same  thing. 

.The  Doctors  of  Sorbonne,  to  whom  the  work  was  submitted,  may 
have  said  the  book  contained  nothing  against  faith  and  morals.  They 
do  not  say  that  he  is  an  authentic  Catholic  historian.  We  apply  criticism 
to  every  work,  and  our  maxim  is  nuUius  addict  us  jurare  in  verba  ma- 
gistrt.  The  opinions  of  two  or  three  Doctors  of  Sorbonne  form 
no  rule  of  faith  for  Catholics,  although,  in  this  instance,  they  say 
nothing,  I  presume,  to  which  we  may  not  very  safely  assent,  while 
we  describe  Du  Pin  in  his  proper  colors.  After  all  Du  Pin  says  noth- 
ing that  does  not  go  to  prove  my  views,  if  considered  fairly,  al- 
though he  w^as  expelled  the  Sorbonne  for  heterodox  opinions ! 

Now  there  were  vacancies,  breaks,  in  the  chain;  but  the  lapse  of 
d  lew  years,  before  binding  together  the  links  of  the  apostolic  succes- 
sion, does  not  affect  the  great  principle  for  which  I  am  contending. 
We  are  no  believers  in  metempsychosis:  or  that,  like  the  supposed  divinity 
of  the  Lama  of  Thibet,  the  soul  of  a  deceased  pope  goes  by  a  hop,  skip 
and  jump,  right  off,  into  his  successor.  We  will  wait  six  months,  or  six 
years,  to  find  a  good  pope.  Time  is  taken  for  this,  since  so  much  de- 
pends on  the  result.  Now  in  this  chain  were  some  bad  popes;  we 
weep  over  the  fact,  my  friends,  and  lament  it.  Mr.  C.  ought  to  have, 
thrown  the  mantle  over  his  shoulders  and  walked  backwards  with  me 
and  covered  these  frailties,  for  the  sake  of  our  common  Christianity. 
The  mass  of  the  succession  is  sound.    But  there  were  some  bad  points. 

It  is  not  the  nawjc,  but  the  religion  they  represented,  that  we  regard. 
Whether  the  stream  of  testimony  came  to  us  through  conduits  of 
gold,  of  silver,  or  of  brass,  it  is  not  the  channelof  communication  we 
regard,  but  the  pure  chrystal  and  transparent  waters  of  celestial  doc- 
trine, of  divine  truth.  Men  are  liable  to  err — Jesus  Christ  said  there 
must  needs  be  scandals.     We  look  for  them ;  we  expect  them  to  occur' 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  145 

while  there  is  yet  remaining  one  single  human  being  on  this  earth. 
None  but  God  is  perfect  and  man  is  good  only  by  divine  assistance. 
I  have  no  special  apology  to  offer  for  a  pope  who  is  a  bad  man.  He 
should  be  the  pattern  of  the  flock  from  the  heart.  He  should  be  the 
salt  of  the  earth — the  light  of  the  world.  He  should  remember  that 
the  "  mighty  shall  be  mightily  torment<3d  ;"  and  that  "  a  most  severe 
judgment  shall  be  for  them  that  bear  rule  if  they  walk  not  according  to 
the  law."  I  should  not  be  surprised  ifthesebad  popes  were  at  tbis  moment 
expiating  their  crimes  in  the  penal  fires  of  hell.  But  what  is  the  pro- 
per inference  to  be  deduced  from  their  melancholy  aberrations  ?  If 
they  like  Lucifer  have  fallen,  bright  lights  from  the  finnament  of  re- 
ligion, do  the  heavens  no  longer  proclaim  the  glory  of  God  1  Do 
the  praises  of  God  resound  there  no  more  ?  Why  it  is  truly  wonder- 
ful, that,  bad  men  as  they  were,  they  should  not  only  have  never  se- 
vered themselves  from  the  faith  but  should  have  been  the  instru- 
ments of  perpetuating  sound  doctrine  at  home  and  abroad.  Nothing, 
my  friends,  gives  me  more  faith  in  the  genuineness  and  truth  of  our 
holy  religion,  than  when  in  reviewing  the  history  of  these  disgraceful 
enormities,  I  find  the  church,  in  the  very  midst  of  scandal,  enough  to 
blacken  and  overthrow  any  earthly  institution,  still  supported  and  up- 
held b}'  the  almighty  hand  of  God.  A  church  that  has  stood  through 
all  that  the  gentleman  has  laid  to  the  charge  of  the  merely  mortal 
men  who  have  presided  for  a  season  over  its  destinies.     A  few  of 

THEM  ERRED  IN  MORALS,  BUT  NONE  OF  THEM    IN    FAITH  ;  SOUnd  doctrilie 

and  sound  morals  were  seen  and  admired,  during  these  sad  eclipses, 
and  infidel  nations  were,  during  that  passing  obscurity  in  Rome,  re- 
joicing in  the  beams  of  the  orient  sun  of  justice,  heralded  by  Catho- 
lic missionaries.  Let  this  be  borne  in  mind  when  my  learned  oppo- 
nent undertakes  to  prove  that  the  pope  is  the  sea-serpent!  And  let 
my  Protestant  friends  understand  that  the  Roman  Catholics  detest 
immorality  as  much  as  they  can,  wherever  it  may  be  found  :  and  most 
of  all,  where  superior  virtue  was  required  by  exalted  station.  We 
too  had  labored  for  a  reformation,  not  of  God's  truth,  for  it  needed 
none,  but  of  men's  morals  which  are  always  liable  to  corruption. 
We  may  cry  out  like  the  apostles,  when  we  behold  such  scandals,  O 
Lord,  save  us  ere  we  perish — but  we  hear  the  divine  answer,  "  why 
fear  ye,  O  you  of  little  faith."     No  cloud  has  ever  yet  impended 

OVER  THE  CHURCH,  THAT  THE  RAINBOW  OF  PROMISE  DID  NOT  SHiNE 
THKOUGH  THE  GLOOM. 

The  object  of  the  institution  of  the  church  being  no  other  than  to 
establish  the  true  worship  of  God,  by  the  overthrow  of  idolatry,  and 
to  sanctify  a  chosen  peoplefor  everlasting  life,  by  the  purest  virtues 
of  religion,  we  are  not  to  wonder  that  Satan,  the  jealous  enemy  of 
human  happiness,  should  exert  his  utmost  powers  to  obstruct  the  be- 
nevolent design.  In  fulfilment  of  the  Savior's  prediction,  and  from 
the  very  nature  of  man,  it  was  necessary  that  persecutions,  heresies, 
schisms  and  domestic  scandals  should  happen ;  but  Jesus  Christ  had 
likewise  foretold  that  they  should  not  prevail.  The  Pagan  tyrants  of 
the  earth  may  rage;  the  courage  and  patience  of  our  martyrs  will  tri- 
umph and  multiply.  Heresies  may  start  up  in  various  forms,  and 
for  a  while  seduce  thousands  into  error;  they  will,  at  length,  sink 
back  again  into  the  dark  abyss  from  which  they  first  emerged.  Gui- 
ded by  the  spirit  of  truth,  and  confirmed  in  the  unity  of  her  belief 
the  church  will  ever  successfully  oppose  to  their  impotent  attempts, 
N  •     10 


146  DEBATE    ax    THE 

the  promises  of  Iier  divine  Founder,  the  antiquity  of  her  faith,  the  ct)n» 
sent  of  nations,  the  order  of  her  hierarchy,  the  holy  severity  of  hei 
discipline,  the  bright  example  of  thousands  of  her  faith tul  childrea 
the  sacred  history  of  her  doctrines,  and  the  decisions  of  her  councils 
Schisms  may  at  times  perplex  and  divide  the  faithful,  hut  the  church 
by  her  authority  will  either  close  the  breach,  or  separate  the  refracto- 
ry members  from  her  communion.  The  vicious  lives  of  some  of  hei 
cliildren  may  contradict  and  disgrace  their  christian  profession,  they 
may  violate  her  laws,  they  may  insult  her  authority,  and  invade  her 
sacred  rights ;  they  never  will  be  able  ta  overturn  her  ministry,  to 
shake  her  hierarchy  or  to  alter  her  doctrine.  She  wUl  never  cease  to 
warn  sinners  of  their  duty,  to  correct,  to  instruct,  to  direet  mankind 
in  the  way  of  salvatioru 

By  her  persevering  zeal  for  God's  honor,  by  the  force  of  her  ex 
hortations,  by  the  solemnity  of  her  public  service,  by  the  morality  of 
her  precepts,  and  by  her  practice  of  the  evangelical  counsels,  she  will 
continue  to  prepare  souls  for  heaven,  while  she  exhibits  to  the  world 
a  rich  assemblage  of  the  most  heroic  virtues.  It  Ls  thus,  that  our  his- 
tory attests  the  care  which  God  has  taken  of  his  churchy 

The  whole  number  of  popes  has  been  nearly  two  hundred  and  sixty. 
Of  these,  the  first  forty  were  saints,  or  martyrs,  a  small  number  only,  not 
more  than  twenty,  can  be  called  bad  raen  ;  the  rest  were  remarkable 
for  eminent  virtue,  charity,  zeal,  learning  and  patronage  of  letters- 
Peter  was  twenty-five  years  bishop  of  Rome  ;  and  no7i  vidtbis  anno* 
Petri,  you  will  not  be  pope  as  long  as  Peter — is  a  proverb  which 
every  new  pope  hears.  Pius  VI.  and  Pius  VII,  came  nearest  to  the 
years  of  Peter,  but  they  did  not  attain  them.  But  says  the  gentle- 
man, the  pope  transferied  his  see  for  some  time  from  Rome,  io> 
Avignon.  I  grant  it ;  but  have  I  not  said,  were  he  a  wanderer  in  A- 
byssinia,  he  would  still  retain  his  title  and  authority. 

We  were  told  of  a  council  which  cashiered  three  popes,  and  made 
a  fourth  !  My  friends,  what  sophistry  is  this  ?  Does  my  friend  think 
lie  is  addressing  people  but  one  remove  from  barbarism,  instead  of  the 
enlightened  and  liberal  citizens  of  the  queen  of  the  west  ?  I  wish  hiii> 
to  understand  that  we,  at  least,  are  equal  to  the  people  of  Bethany  in 
intelligence.  Among  these  citizens,  I  thank  God,  my  lot  is  cast. 
Does  Sir.  O. —  suppose  that  they  cannot  answer  his  sophistry  by  the 
true  statement  of  the  factl  The  council  cashiered  three  doubtful  popes,, 
or  rather  no  popes  at  all,  and  elected  one  true  pope.  What  has  l>ecome 
of  his  logic  ? 

Stephen  V'l.  had  the  body  of  Formosus  dug  up  and  cut  off  his  fingers. 
My  friend  has  taken  this  from  Pope  and  McGuire's  discussion,  and  ha» 
seen  the  answer  there.  In  this  unpardonable  act  of  Stephen,  we  al 
least  discern  zeal  for  the  rules  of  discipline,  which  forbade  the  irans- 
terring  of  a  bishop  from  one  see  to  another.  For  this  ofieuee  the  need- 
less act  of  severity  was  done.  It  shews  the  popes  expose  wh«t  they 
think  wrong  in  popes  ;  just  as  my  friend  would  know  nothing  of  their 
misdeeds,  if  Catholic  historians  had  not  had  sincerity,  piety  and  zea? 
to  denounce  them.  Genebrard  said  that  the  popes  were  more  often 
apostates  than  apostles.  I  am  sure  that,  in  this  case,  truth  was  sac- 
rificed to  wit,  and  faithful  testinwny  to  virtue  as  well  as  faithful  ex- 
position of  vice,  for  the  jingle  lietween  the  words  apostates  and 
njwstles.      But   Genebrard    says    not,   absolutely,   they    were   apos- 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  147 

tales,  but  that  they  had  fallen  short  of  the  virtues  of  their  predeces- 
sors. 

My  friend  quarrels  with  the  name,  cardinals.  The  name  is  Latin  and 
as  old  as  that  language.  But  I  will  not  contend  for  the  name.  He 
says  the  cardinals,  were  not  so  called  for  1000  years,  but  did  not  show 
his  authority.  This  was,  however,  the  title  given  to  pri<?sis  charged 
with  the  care  of  large  churches,  as  far  back  as  the  year  150,  or  at 
least  in  300.  But  call  them  what  you  may,  they  were  3  portic*.,  and 
an  eminent  portion,  of  the  Roman  clergy  in  all  ages.  Now,  as  for 
merly,  there  are  cardinal  priests,  cardinal  deacons,  and  even  cardinal 
laymen.  They  are  a  superior  order  of  men,  the  patrons  of  the  arts 
and  sciences,  as  well  as  the  ornaments  and  supports  of  the  church, 
and  the  benefactors  of  the  poor.  They  liberally  entertain  and  treat  our 
travelling  fellow-citizens  with  great  civility — for  instance,  Mr.  Dewey, 
an  Unitarian  minister,  lately  in  Rome,  and  cardinal  Weld,  a  dis- 
tinguished English  nobleman,  in  whose  father's  castle,  at  Lulworth, 
if  I  am  not  mistaken,  our  first  archbishop,  the  cousin  of  Charles  Car- 
roll of.  CarroUton,  was  consecrated  bishop. — Read  Mr.  Dewey's  ele- 
gant and  thrilling  pages.  They  will  almost  make  you  a  Catholic. 
Certainly  they  will  liberalize  your  minds  already  raised  far  above  vul- 
gar prejudices.  The  cardinals  elect  the  pope — but  if  the  pope  creates 
the  cardinals,  surely  he  does  not  create  his  own  electors  ! 

Mr.  C. —  has  not  told  us  yet,  from  what  true  and  holy  apostolic 
church,  the  Roman  church  apostatized.  He  has  told  you  of  the  Albi- 
genses,  Vaudois,  Novatians,  Donatists,  &c.,  hut  they  furnish  no  con- 
tinuous church.  They  are,  I  say  again,  ignoble  ancestry.  My  friends, 
read  history  for  yourselves  if  you  wish  to  see  what  a  miserable  set  of 
wretches  these  sectarians  were. 

My  friend  says,  that  Peter  was  married — but  I  defy  him  to  prove 
that  he  retained  his  wife  after  he  became  a  bishop.  I  will  meet  Mr. 
Campbell  on  this  doctrine  of  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy,  and  shew 
him  in  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  1st  Cor.  i.  26,  and  in  those  of  Jesus 
Christ,  Matthew  xix.  12,  whose  expressions,  although  he  was  purity 
itself,  I  dare  not  repeat  in  Mr.  C — 's  fastidious  ears,  "  that  there  are 
not  many  wise  according  to  thefiesh.^^  St.  Paul,  who  was  a  bachelor, 
says,  1st  Cor.  vii.  "  I  would  that  all  were  as*myself.  I  say  to  the 
unmarried  and  the  widows  ;  it  is  good  for  them  if  they  so  continue 
even  as  I.  v.  8.  He  that  is  without  a  wife  is  solicitous  for  the  things 
that  belong  to  the  Lord,  how  he  may  please  God.  But  he  that  is  with 
a  wife,  is  solicitous  for  the  things  of  the  world,  how  he  may  please 
his  wife  :  and  he  is  divided.  And  the  unmarried  woman  and  the  vir- 
gin thinketh  on  the  things  of  the  Lord,  that  she  may  be  holy  both  in 
body  and  spirit.  But  she  that  is  married  thinketh  on  the  things  of  the 
world,  how  she  may  please  her  husband."  Read  the  entire  chapte.. 
Marriage  was  ordained  by  Almighty  God  for  the  propagation  of  the 
human  race.  The  Catholic  church  not  only  approves  the  institution,  but 
teaches  thai  Christ  hath  exalted  it  to  the  dignity  of  a  sacrament.  St. 
Paul,  while  he  wishes  all  to  be  like  himself,  unmarried,  still  acknow- 
ledges that  all  are  not  called  to  that  state;  and  they  who  cannot  prac- 
tise continence,  he  wishes  to  marry;  so  does  the  Catholic  church.  Her 
ministers  are  not  allowed  to  take  a  vow  of  chastity  until  they  have  at- 
tained an  age  when  they  can,  aided  by  divine  grace,  decidi  on  theii 
capability  for  its  pure  observance.     And  now,  young  ladies,  and  gen- 


148  DEBATE    ON    THE 

tlemen,  take  caie  you  never  become  what  Mr.  C.  would  make  you, 
the  successors  of  Paulicians.  They  condemned  all  connubial  ties, 
saying  that  marriage  came  from  the  evil  principle.  But,  married  or 
single,  let  us  not  forget  that  our  days  in  this  life  are  numbered  ;  the 
gayest  are  frequently  death's  earliest  victims.  "For  the  fashum  of  this 
world,  says  the  apostle,  passeth  away."  Let  priests  then  do  good,  even 
as  Catholic  religious  have  done,  to  the  wliole  human  family,  renounc- 
ing the  lies  that  would  bind  them  to  a  few  only,  that  they  may  be  like 
God,  the  fathers  and  benefactors  of  many. 

Mr.  C.  spoke  of  ministering  to  the  sick.  I  thank  him  for  the  hint. 
In  deeds  of  charity,  the  Catholic  priesthood,  the  Catholic  religious  of 
all  orders,  are  unsurpassed.  Their  '  labor  of  love'  is  seen  in  the  hospital, 
•  the  pest-house,  the  dungeon,  the  orphan  asylum;  where  the  cholera 
makes  its  dreadful  ravages,  where  the  pestilence  stalketh  at  noonday,  oi 
midnight !     Hear  Waddington — 

"  Tlie  Ursuliiies.  Of  the  more  modern  orders,  there  is  also  one  which  may  seem 
to  require  our  notice — that  of  the  Ursulines.  Its  origin  is  ascribed  to  Angela 
di  Brescia,  about  the  year  1537,  though  the  saint  from  whom  it  received  its 
name,  Ursula  Bcnincasa,  a  native  of  Naples,  was  born  ten  years  afterwards.  Its 
character  was  peculiar,  and  recalls  our  attention  to  the  prinntive  form  of  ascetic 
devotion.  The  duties  of  those  holy  sisters  were  the  purest  within  the  circle  of 
human  benevolence — to  minister  to  the  sick,  to  relieve  the  poor,  to  console  the 
miserable,  to  pray  with  the  penitent.  These  charitable  offices  they  undertook 
to  execute  without  the  bond  of  any  community,  without  the  obligation  of  any 
monastic  vow,  without  any  separation  from  society,  any  renoiuictnient  of  theii 
domestic  duties  and  virtues.  And  so  admirably  were  those  offices, in  millions  ot 
instances,  performed,  that  had  all  other  female  orders  been  really  as  useless  and 
vicious,  as  they  are  sometimes  falsely  described  to  be,  the  virtues  of  the  Ursu- 
lines had  alone  been  sufficient  to  redeem  the  monastic  name. 

But  it  is  very  far  from  true,  that  these  other  orders  were  either  commonly  dis- 
solute or  generally  useless.  Occasional  scandals  have  engendered  universal 
calunmifs."     Waddingto  '"s  Church  Hist,  page  325,  JNew  York  edit.  1835. 

Mr.  C.  spoke  of  bad  popes,  Nicholas  III.  &c.  &c.  and  of  monks. — 
Hear  again — what  this  Protestant  historian  says  of  them  and  of  this 
very  Nicholas. 

"  It  is  not  without  reason  that  Roman  Catholic  writers  vaunt  the  disinterested 
devotion  of  the  early  JVIendicants — how  assiduous  they  were  in  supplying  the 
spiritual  wants  of  the  poor,  how  frequent  in  prisons  and  m  hospitals,  how  forward 
to  encounter  the  fire  or  the  pestilence;  how  instant  on  all  those  occasions  where 
the  peril  was  imminent  and* the  reward  not  in  this  world.  They  were  equally 
distinguished  in  another,  and  not  less  righteous,  duty,  the  propagation  of  Chris- 
tianity among  remote. and  savage  nations.  We  have  noticed,  in  a  former  chap 
ter,  tiie  method  by  whiih  the  gospel  was  introduced  into  the  north  of  Europe 
before  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  century.  In  the  twelfth,  we  observe  Boles* 
laus,  duke  of  Poland,  opening  the  path  for  its  reception  in  Pomerania  by  the 
sword;  and  in  like  manner,  both  the  Sclavonians  and  Pinlanders,  were  prepared 
for  conversion  by  conquest.  Again,  Urban  VIII.  consecrated  Mainhard,  an  un- 
successful missionary',  bishop  of  the  Livonians,  and  proclaimed  a  holy  war  against 
them ;  the  bishop  conquered  his  see,  and  promulgated  at  the  head  of  an  arnir 
the  tidings  of  evangelical  concord.  The  same  methods  were  pursued  by  Innocent 
III. '  But  from  that  time  forward  we  find  much  more  frequent  mention  of  pious 
missionaries,  whose  labours  were  directed  to  accomplish  their  great  work  by 
legitimate,  or,  at  least,  by  peaceful  means.  It  may  be  true,  that  some  of  them 
were  satisfied  with  mere  nominal  conversions,  and  that  others  had  chiefly  in  view 
either  their  own  advancement,  or  the  extension  of  the  papal  sovereignty.  But 
there  were  likewise  many  who  were  animated  by  the  most  admirable  motives, 
and  whose  exertions,  if  they  failed  of  complete  success,  failed  not  through  any 
want  of  disinterested  devotfon.  The  missions  of  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth 
centuries  were  principally  directed  to  the  nosth  of  Asia.  In  1245,  Innocent  IV. 
sent  an  embassy,  composed  of  Dominicans  and  Franciscans,  to  the  Tartars;  anil 
a  friend'y  communication  was  so  maintained,  that  the  envoys  of  Abaca,  their 


ROUAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  149 

king,  were  present,  in  1271,  at  the  second  council  of  Lyons.  Nicholas  III.  (in 
1278)  and  Nicholas  IV.  (in  1289,)  renewed  those  exertions.  John  of  Monte 
Corvino,  a  Franciscan,  was  distinguished  during  the  conclusion  of  the  century 
by  the  success  of  his  labors;  and  in  1307,  Clement  V.  erected  an  archiepiscopal 
«ee  at  Canibalu,  (Pekin,)  which  he  conferred  upon  that  missionary.  SevCTi  other 
bishops,  also  Franciscans,  were  sent  to  his  support  by  the  same  pope;  and  this 
distant  branch  of  the  hierarchy  was  carefully  nourished  by  succeeding  pontilTs, 
especially  John  XXII.  and  Benedict  XII.  It  is  certain  that  the  number  of  Chris- 
tians was  not  inconsiderable,  both  among  the  Chinese  and  Moguls,  as  latt  as  the 
year  1370, — and  they  were  still  increasing,  when  they  were  suddenly  «wen(* 
away  and  almost  wholly  exterminated  by  the  Mahometan  arms.  Howbeit,  trie 
disastrous  overthrow  ol  their  establishment  detracts  nothing  from  the  merit  of 
those  who  constructed  it;  and  it  must  not  be  forgotten,  that  the  instruments  in 
this  work  were  Mendicants,  and,  for  the  most  part,  FranciscHps."'     lb.  p.  547. 

The  Methodists  have  done  themselves  honor  by  the  praises  they  have 
bestowed  on  Francis  Xavier,  a  Jesuit.  They  have  published  his  life, 
and  to  day,  if  I  have  time,  I  will  quote  from  it  some  beautiful  extracts. 

They  and  other  Protestants  have  also  published  Thomas  a  Kerapis, 
or  the  christian  pattern.  Where,  except  in  the  Gospel,  can  purer  mo- 
rality be  found  1  And  Thomas  a  Kempis  was  a  monk.  We  are  told 
that  Sacchi  said  that  the  Albigenses  and  Vaudois  made  a  show  of  piety. 
That  is  a  fact,  and  a  pretty  show  it  was.  I  will  not  read  the  indicated, 
but  forbidden  page  of  narrative  sincere — better  blot  it  with  a  tear  ! 

If  the  pope  is  charged  with  severity  to  kings,  it  is  because  kingfs 
were  tyrants  and  the  pope  was  the  advocate  of  the  weak,  and  the 
enemy  of  arbitrary  power.  The  people  were  crushed,  and  had  no  re- 
source but  in  the  influence  which  God  gave  to  the  head  of  the 
church. 

"With  all  its  errors,  (the  papacy's,)  its  coriuptions,  and  its  crimes,  it  was, 
morally  and  intellectually,  the  conservative  power  of  Christendom.  Politically, 
too,  it  was  the  savior  of"  Europe;  for,  in  all  human  probability,  the  west,  like 
the  east,  must  have  been  overrun  by  Mahominedanism,  and  sunk  in  irremediable 
degradation,  through  the  pernicious  institutions  which  have  everywhere  accom- 
panied it;  if,  in  that  great  crisis  of  the  world,  the  Roman  church  nad  not  roused 
the  nations  to  an  united  and  prodigious  effort  commensurate  with  the  danger. 

In  the  frightful  state  of  society  which  prevailed  during  the  dark  ages,  the 
church  everywhere  exerted  a  controlling  and  remedial  influence.  Every  place 
of  worship  was  an  asylum,  which  was  always  respected  by  the  law,  and  generally 
even  by  lawless  violence.  It  is  recorded,  a.«  one  of  the  peculiar  miseries  of  Ste 
phen's  miserable  reign,  that  during  those  long  troubles,  the  soldiers  learned  to 
disregard  the  right  of  sanctuary.  Like  many  other  parts  of  the  Romish  system, 
this  right  had  prevailed  in  the  heathep  world,  though  it  was  not  ascribed  to 
every  temple.  It  led,  as  it  had  done  under  the  Romish  empire,  to  abuses  which 
became  intolerable;  but  it  originated  in  a  humane  and  pious  purpose,  not  only 
screening  oflenders  from  laws,  the  severity  of  which  amounted  to  injustice,  but, 
in  cases  of  private  wrong,  affording  time  for  passion  to  abate,  and  for  the  desire 
of  vengeance  to  be  appeased.  The  cities  of  refuge  were  not  more  needed,  under 
the  Mosaic  dispensation,  than  such  asylums  in  ages  when  the  administration  of 
justice  was  eitner  detestably  inhuman,  or  so  lax,  that  it  allowed  free  scope  to 
individual  resentment.  They  have,  therefore,  generally  been  found  wherever 
there  are  the  first  rudiments  of  civil  and  religious  order.  The  churchyards  als«  • 
were  privileged  places,  whither  the  poor  people  conveyed  their  goods  for  secu- 
rity. The  protection  which  the  ecclesiastical  power  extended  in  such  cases,  k»pt 
up  in  the  people,  who  so  often  stood  in  need  of  it,  a  feeling  of  reverence  and  at- 
tachment to  tne  church.  They  felt  that  religion  had  a  power  on  earth,  and  that 
It  was  always  exercised  for  their  benefit. 

The  civil  power  was  in  those  ages  so  inefficient  for  the  preservation  of  public 
tranquility,  tnat  when  a  country  was  at  peace  with  all  its  neighbors,  it  was  liable 
to  be  disturbed  by  private  wars,  individuals  takino:  upon  themselves  the  right  of 
deciding  their  own  quarrels,  and  avenging  their  own  wrong*.  Where  there 
existed  no  deadly  feud,  pretexts  were  easily  made  by  turbulent  and  rapacious  inea^ 
n3 


150  DEBATE    ON    THE 

for  engaging  in  such  contests,  and  they  were  not  scrupulous  whom  they  seiied  and 
imprisoned,  tor  the  purpose  of  extorting  a  ransom.  JVo  law,  therefore,  was  ever 
more  thankfully  received,  than  when  the  council  of  Clerniot  enacted,  that,  from 
sun-set  on  Wednesday  to  sun-rise  on  iMonda}-,  in  every  week,  the  truce  of  God 
should  t)e  observed,  on  pain  of  exconiiuunication.  Wdl  might  the  inoffensive 
and  peaceable  part  of  the  community  (always  the  great,  but  in  evil  times  the 
inert,  and  therefore  the  suffering  part,)  regard,  with  grateful  devotion,  a  power, 
under  whose  protection  they  slept  four  nights  of  the  week  in  peace,  when  other- 
wise they  would  have  been  in  peril  every  hour.     The  aanie  power  by  which  in- 

*dividuals  were  thus  benefited,  was  not  unfrequently  exercised  in  great  national 
concerns;  if  the  monarch  were  endangered  or  oppressed  either  by  a  foreign 
enemy  or  by  a  combination  of  his  barons,  here  was  an  authority  to  which  ne 
could  resort  for  an  effectual  interposition  in  his  behalf;  and  .the  same  shield  was 
extended  over  thetiBssals,  when  they  called  upon  the  pope  to  defend  them  against 
a  wrongful  exertion  of  the  sovereign  power."  fiouthey's  Book  of  the  Churchy 
page  293.     Boston,  \st.  edit.  1825. 

Now  I  must  follow  Mr.  C.  wheeling  right  ahout  from  rear  to  van. 
We  are  told  that  Peter  exercised  the  grand  commission  of  Apostle— 
and  that  therefore  he  could  not  have  been  bishop  of  Rome,  and  again 
that  Paul  was  sent  to  the  Gentiles  and  Peter  to  the  Jews.  But  Peter 
was  the  first  apostle  sent  to  the  Gentiles — by  the  angel  of  God.  He 
received  Cornelius  the  centurion  into  the  church.  He  founded  the 
see  of  Antioch — a  Gentile  city.  If  Peter  was  an  apostle  of  the  whole 
world,  where  should  he  place  his  head  quarters  ]  Where,  but  at  Rome, 
the  mistress  of  the  world,  worthy  field  for  a  chief  apostle's  zeal ; 
where  he  could  at  once  be  heard  by  Gentiles  and  by  Jews,  by  Greeks, 
Barbarians  and  Romans. 

We  are  told  there  are  no  vices  to  be  discovered  in  the  Pagan  em- 
perors more  flagrant  and  gloomy  than  those  of  the  Roman  pontiffs— 
that  they  became  proverbial  for  their  iniquity.  But  I  have  shown  that 
these  sweeping  denunciations  are  glaringly  untrue.  There  were  39 
martyrs  out  of  260  or  270  popes.  If  there  were  a  few  bad  men  among 
them,  shall  we  for  that  reason  fling  away  our  faith  ?  Does  Christ  say 
so  ■?  -Did  he  not  say  that  it  must  needs  be  that  scandals  come  1  And 
were  not  the  vast  majority  of  the  popes  entitled  to  veneration  1 
Suppose  there  were  about  a  dozen  that  were  infamous,  and  that  there 
were  even  fifty  of  various  shades  of  guilt,  or  imperfection,  there  were 
still  upwards  of  200  worthy.  Christ  has  said  that  "  many  are  called, 
but  few  chosen."  Show  me  200  of  the  Roman  emperors  or  a  like 
proportion  of  any  other  rulers,  to  the  popes,  who  were  as  good  men, 
and  who  have  deserved  to  go  to  heaven.  Shall  we  point  to  Nero 
holding  up  the  dagger  which  he  had  plunged  into  the  breast  of  hi$ 
own  mother  1  to  Diocletian,  the  man  of  sin, — the  antichris  of  the 
apostles,  who  mowed  down  hundreds  of  meek  and  peaceful  disciples 
at  once  ? — to  Caligula,  the  murderer  of  the  saints  1 — to  Maxentius  ? — 
or  the  monster  Maximin  ?  Where  is  there  a  parallel  to  their  atroci- 
ties ■?  My  friend  has  talked  of  the  inquisition,  and  on  that  point  also  1 

"will  meet  him.  The  inquisition  was  the  vice  of  the  age  and  not  of  the 
church.  It  was  unknown  for  many  centuries.  In  many  Catholic 
countries  it  was  never  received.  Other  churches  and  times  have, 
likewise,  their  sins  of  blood  to  answer  for.  [Time  expired.] 

Half-past  11  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

My  friends  if  we  proceed  in  this  course  we  never  shall  dismiss  the 
propositions  we  have  before  us.     If  we  are  to  sit  here  and  listen  to 


EOMAK    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  151 

such  a  variety  of  matter  wholly  irrelevant  to  the  question  we  shall 
never  prove  any  thing,  or  know  what  is  proved.  Must  we  haveques 
tions  introduced  reaching  back  to  the  beginning  of  the  discussion  and 
forward  to  its  close,  and  touching  upon  the  whole  system  of  theology 
in  every  speech  ?  I  have  said  already  I  will  not  lose  sight  of  my 
dut)'  so  as  to  respond  to  every  thing  in  one  speech. 

I  almost  trembled  when  my  opponent  arose  with  so  much  pomp 
and  appearance  of  having  found  a  triumphant  proof  of  his  assertions 
in  some  hidden,  and  by  me,  unexplored  corner  of  Irenaeus,  What  I 
said  I  to  myself,  have  I  not  thoroughly  examined  this  matter?  Is  it 
possible  that  there  yet  remains  one  passage  unknown  to  me  against 
my  assertion,  and  have  I  committed  myself?  But  it  was  even  a  lit- 
tle less  alarming  than  his  blustering  about  the  consecration  of  Phocas. 
Judge  of  my  surprise  and  great  relief,  when  I  found  he  was  only  rea- 
ding one  of  his  elegant  extracts,  which  he  styles  his  proof!  that  in- 
deed, it  was  the  same  old  story  new  vamped  and  varnished,  without 
any  reference  at  all,  to  the  present  debate.  Irenaeus  said,  "  while  Pe- 
ter and  Paul  were  founding  the  congregation  at  Rome."  I  would 
ask,  is  there  in  this  audience,  any  stripling  in  knowledge,  who  under- 
stands that  founding  a  congregation  makes  a  man  bishop  of  that 
church  all  his  life?  Missionaries  go  abroad,  they  plant  congregations 
in  particular  places ;  and  they  go  from  country  to  country,  from  city 
to  city,  to  found  other  churches.  Are  they  bishops  of  all  the  congre- 
gations that  they  establish  1  It  is  essential  to  a  missionary  not  to  be 
stationary.  But  why  expose  a  matter,  already  evident  to  all  1  It  is 
the  gentleman's  last  effort.  He  has  explored  all  antiquity,  and  all 
he  can  find,  after  three  or  four  days'  search,  is  this  single  fragment  of 
a  saint,  stating  on  hearsay,  that  Paul  and  Peter  planted  the  church  at 
Rome  !  So  ends  the  controversy  on  that  point,  the  main  pillar  of  the 
Roman  church.  There  is  another  little  matter  (there  are  too  many 
little  matters)  which  I  wish  to  dispose  of. 

The  gentleman  affects  a  great  accuracy  in  his  knowledge,  and  great 
precision  on  the  part  of  his  authorities.  He  seems  to  glory  in  that 
sort  of  reputation,  else  I  would  not  select  this  trifle.  How  often  has 
he  asserted  that-  Sylvester  summoned  the  council  of  Nice,  and  that 
the  pope's  legates  presided  over  it !  And  how  often  has  he  ^ried  to 
prove  it !  Like  some  other  matters  already  disposed  of,  after  sleeping 
two  nights  upon  the  subject,  as  one  that  had  a  pleasant  dream,  he 
awakens  and  affirms  again,  that  Osius,  a  Spanish  bishop,  was  legate 
of  Sylvester,  and  as  such  presided  at  Nice.  But  did  he  prove  it? 
I  shall  read  you  some  testimony  on  this  subject.  I  do  this,  not  to  add 
to  the  weight  of  my  arguments  one  grain  of  sand ;  but  to  prove  that 
when  I  asserf  any  thing  as  a  fact,  I  do  it  advisedly,  and  will  stand  to  it. 
Permit  me  now  to  correct  a  mistake  into  which  the  gentleman  has 
rallen,  that  I  relied  upon  the  testimony  of  an  ephemeral  paper  in  Ken- 
tucky. I  did  not  say,  that  it  was  upon  such  authority  I  read  anj'  au- 
thor here.  My  allusion  to  that  paper,  was  a  pure  argumentum  ad  ho- 
minem  ,•  and  was  made  for  bishop  Purcell  and  no  one  else.  [The 
bishop  of  Bardstown  or  some  of  his  clergy  admitted  that  Eusebius 
and  Du  Pin,  though  not  good  Catholics,  "  were  authentic  historians." 
Rut  that  admission  gives  them  no  new  weight,  or  indeed,  no  weight  at 
aJ  with  mc.  I  have  already  given  my  reasons  for  the  authority  of  Du 
Pin.  But  where,  may  I  ask,  is  his  authority  for  Sylvester's  calling 
the  council  of  Nice!     The  emperor  did  it  at  the  general  suggestion 


152  DEBATE    ON    THE 

of  the  eastern  bishops.  And  if  Osius  presided,  we  have  no  reason 
to  think  that  he  did  it  as  the  pope's  legate.  For  this  we  have  an- 
cient authority.  The  gentleman  spoke  in  warm  admiration  of  Osi- 
us :  but  did  he  not  apostatize,  or  some  way  lose  his  orthodoxy  ■?]  He 
was,  indeed,  a  learned  and  talented  man — a  sort  of  standinir  presi- 
dent in  the  early  councils ;  and  in  that  age  of  the  world  as  among  ec- 
clesiastics ther3  were  few  men  of  general  learning,  we  therefore  find 
him  conspicuous  in  all  assemblies  ;  and  his  name  stands  first  in  the 
subscriptions  of  the  decrees  and  creeds  of  the  early  part  of  the  4th 
century,  but  that  he  presided  as  the  pope's  legate  in  any  council,  espe 
cially  that  of  Nice,  is  insusceptible  of  proof. 

We  shall  however  hear  antiquity  on  the  subject. 

"  Coiistantine  seeing'  that  he  had  labored  in  vain  to  allay  the  disputes  which 
divided  the  church,  thought  it  would  be  the  most  ready  and  eti'ectual  means  to 
restore  peace,  to  call  a  numerous  synod  composed  of  eastern  and  western  bishops. 
This  council  was  called  acuinenicai,  i.  e.  a  council  of  the  whole  world,  or  the 
whole  earth,  because  it  was  called  together  from  all  parts  of  the  Roman  empire, 
,  to  which  the  title  of  the  world,  or  earth,  was  given,  and  which  did  almost  in- 
clude the  Catholic  church.  This  council  was  assembled  by  order  of  the  em- 
peror at  Nice,  a  city  of  Bithynia,  about  the  month  of  July,  in  the  year  325,  in 
the  second  year  of  Constantine's  reign.  St.  Sylvester  was  then  bishop  of  Rome, 
who  sent  thither  Victor  and  Vincentius,  his  legates.  It  is  commonly  held  that 
this  cou.ncil  consist-ed  of  318  bishops;  but  those  who  were  present  at  it  do  not 
precisely  determine  this  number,  but  say  only  that  there  were  about  300  bishops. 
'Tis  not  certainly  known  who  presided  in  this  council,  but  it  is  very  probable 
that  it  was  Hosius  who  held  the  chief  place  there  in  his  own  name  because  he 
hajd  already  taken  cognizance  of  this  anair,  and  was  much  esteemed  by  the  em- 
peror, who  was  then  present. 

Athanasius,  in  his  second  apology,  calls  Hosius  the  father  and  president  of  all 
the  councils.  The  name  of  this  bishop  is  the  first  in  all  the  subscriptions.  Alex- 
ander was  much  esteemed,  as  appears  by  the  letter  of  the  council.  Eustathius, 
of  Antioch,  was  called  the  chief  bishop  of  the  council  by  Proclus  and  by  t'acun- 
dus;  but  it  is  more  probable  that  Hosius  presided  there  in  his  own  name,  and  not 
m  the  pope's,  for  he  no  where  assumes  the  title  of  legate  of  the  holy  see;  and 
none  of  the  ancients  say  that  he  presided  in  this  council  in  the  pupe's  name, 
GelasiusCizicenus,  who  first  affirmed  it,  says  it  without  any  proof  or  authority." 

Du  Pm,  vol.  \,jp.  598,  599. 

Now  where  is  the  gentleman's  authority  for  the  nature  of  the  bish- 
op of  Rome  or  his  legates,  either  calling  or  presiding  in  this  council ! 
Upon  such  disregard  of  ancient  history  rest  many  such  assertions  now 
in  corafhon  circulation  and  in  common  belief.  But  as  I  said  before 
on  this  point,  I  should  not  have  dwelt  a  moment  upon  it,  had  not  my 
opponent  affected  peculiar  accuracy  in  his  details. 

The  bishop  admits  Barronius  to  be  an  authentic  historian.  Now, 
neither  Barronius  nor  Du  Pin  even  admitted  so  much  in  reference  to 
the  demerits  of  the  popes,  as  bishop  Purcell  has  admitted  in  the  pre- 
sence of  this  great  congregation :  For  he  says  "  I  have  no  do>jbt 
but  these  bad  popes  are  now  expiating  their  crimes  in  the  pen- 
al fires  of  hell."  While  these  words  were  sounding  in  my  ears, 
the  question  simultaneously  arose,  with  the  sensation  produced,  W'hat ! 
Has  the  Lord  Jesus  his  vicars — his  representatives  on  earth,  now 
roasting  in  the  flames  of  hell  ?  I  put  it  to  intelligent  men,  whether 
such  an  idea  is  not  repugnant  to  every  principle  of  the  christian  re- 
ligion 1 

When  Simon  proposed  to  purchase  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
what  did  Peter  say  to  him  T  "  Thy  money  perish  with  thee  !"  Does 
this  look  like  winking  at  such  enormities  1  Were  not  the  apostles 
all  persons  of  unblemished  reputation  %  and  if  such  holy  men,  tli« 


HOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  153 

models  of  every  virtue,  \vere  first  appointed  by  the  Lord  to  conduct 
the  affairs  of  his  kingdom,  how  comes  it  to  pass  that  he  has  changed 
his  administration  and  trusted  it  to  such  a  succession  of  pretended 
representatives  1  Has  Christ  changed  his  purpose  with  respect  to 
.  his  church,  that  he  will  allow  its  supreme  head  on  earth  to  act  every 
species  of  crime,  and  yet  be  his  acceptable  vicegerents !  May  I  not 
say,  that  the  darkest  hour  of  midnight  is  not  more  opposed  lothe  light 
of  noon,  than  is  the  general  character  of  the  popes  of  Rome  to  that 
of  the  apostles  ! 

The  gentleman  exclaims,  "  How  precise  these  Catholics  always 
in  their  dates !"  There  is  however,  an  over  precision,  that  creates 
suspicion.  When  a  man  begins  to  swear  very  circumstantially  before 
his  word  is  called  in  question,  I  begin  to  suspect  his  evidence :  and 
when  I  see  authors  testifying  that  Peter  reigned  twenty  four  years 
five  months  and  ten  days,  bishop  of  Rome  (as  I  have  it  on  some  ta- 
Dles  of  the  popes ;)  I  think  he  ought  also  to  come  down  to  hours, 
minutes  and  seconds  !  and  then  we  would  know  how  to  appreciate  him 

This  resembles  Peter's  putting  away  his  wife  after  he  became 
bishop  of  Rome.  "  What  accuracy  !"  Let  the  gentleman  prove  first 
that  he  was  bishop  of  Rome,  and  then  we  shall  show  that  he  still 
retained  his  wife. 

The  gentleman's  compliments  to  the  citizens  of  Cincinnati,  however 
well  deserved  on  their  part,  will  not  so  blind  the  eyes  of  this  audience 
as  not  to  understand  the  argument ;  and  the  design  of  their  panegyris.t. 
Nor  will  his  gratuitous  denunciation  of  the  Albigenses,  Donatists, 
Novatians,  Paulicians,  and  others,  pass  for  historic  truth.  They  were 
such  "  vile  heretics"  in  the  estimation  of  "  holy  mother,"  as  are  wo 
"  schismatical  Protestants."  Their  reputation  we  have  fully  sustain- 
ed from  unexceptionable  authority. 

The  gentleman  will  have  Du  Pin  in  every  speech.  Can  he  prove, 
or  has  he  proved  him  unfaithful  in  stating  a  single  historic  fact?  Not 
one.  Nor  can  he  disprove  those  Roman  Catholic  vouchers  for  him 
on  whose  testimony  I  rely. 

But  as  the  reiteration  of  assertion  is  no  proof,  and  as  I  am  not  ob- 
liged to  repeat  arguments  as  often  as  he  makes  assertions,  I  shall 
notice  one  or  two  new  matters  to  which  he  would  give  emphasis. 

But  it  is  time  to  examine  the  philosophy  of  the  plea  for  wicked 
popes.  The  Messiah  descended  through  a  long  line  of  ancestors,  some 
of  whom  were  wicked  men.  That  is,  the  human  nature  of  the  Messiah 
descended  through  some  wicked  progenitors.  Indeed  !  To  the  honor 
of  Jesus  Christ,  be  it  said,  he  humbled  himself  for  our  exaltation 
he  condescended  to  be  made  of  a  woman,  to  be  descended  from  Adam, 
Noah,  and  others.  In  such  a  long  line,  he  must  necessarily,  have 
had  all  the  varieties  of  human  nature  in  his  ancestors.  He  chose 
to  make  himself  of  ro  reputation — to  be  born  in  a  stable,  of  the  hum- 
blest and  poorest  parentage.  Bui  who  would  argue  from  thence,  that 
because  his  flesh  and  blood  were  so  descended  ;  therefore,  the  Holy 
Spirit  must  descend  to  the  church,  in  all  its  official  gifts  of  authority 
and  governmental  influence,  through  a  lineage  of  persons,  whose  hearts 
were  full  of  murder,  adultery,  and  all  uncleanness  1  and  that  through 
the  hands  of  such  persons  all  the  graces  of  the  ordinances  must  flow 
to  all  the  partakers  of  the  christian  institution  ]  Does  not,  let  me  ask, 
the  defence  make  the  matter  worse  1  Is  there  any  analogy  between  the 
aescent  of  flesh,  and  the  Spirit  of  God  ]    Is  the  formation  of  th« 

20 


154  DEBATE    ON    THE 

human  body,  and  the  creation  of  the  mystical  body  of  Christ,  matters 
of  equal  value  and  importance  1 

God  has  generally,  employed  the  best  of  our  race  in  all  the  affairs 
of  our  salvation.  His  agents  have  often  been  angels  or  the^  best  men. 
He  did  not  often  impart  such  sacred  trusts  to  men  of  bad  character. 
A  wicked  Balaam  or  a  treacherous  Judas  may  have  been  amongst 
those  emplo3'^ed,  for  special  reasons  in  some  great  crisis.  In  the  case 
of  Balaam,  he  caused  even  an  ass  to  open  its  mouth  and  reprove  the 
madness  of  the  prophet :  but  that  he  ever  set  such  persons  over  hia 
church,  and  gave  the  affairs  of  his  kingdom  into  such  hands — that 
he  went  so  far  as  to  select  these  wicked  popes  to  speak  his  word, 
is  repugnant  to  all  history,  and  our  experience  of  his  dealings  with 
men. 

The  gentleman  says  there  were  two  hundred  good  popes.  I  do  not 
admit  this :  but  I  am  willing  to  help  him  so  far  as  to  say  I  can  count 
forty  nine  saints  out  of  the  first  Jifty  popes  according  to  my  calendar. 
But  they  lived  long  ago.  Not  one  of  the  last  fifty  has  been  a  saint. — 

Bishop  Purcell — Yes  there  is  one. 

Mr.  Campbell — I  beg  the  gentleman's  pardon.  There  is  one  saint, 
then,  out  of  the  last  fifty  popes  !  It  is  a  happy  thing  for  human  na- 
ture, that  the  vices  and  faults  of  those  who  have  redeeming  qualities, 
die  with  them,  while  their  virtues  live  and  magnify,  long  after  theii 
death.  Hence,  our  remote  ancestors  and  those  of  ancient  times,  if  al 
all  distinguished,  are  canonized  in  the  admiration  of  the  living,  and 
are  supposed  greatly  to  excel  our  contemporaries. 

The  bishop  says,  that  if  the  pope  were  a  poor  wanderer  in  the 
mountains  of  the  moon,  it  would  not  destroy  his  authority. — Though 
the  see  of  St.  Peter  should  be  vacant  for  seventy  years  !  If  so,  the 
whole  argument  for  Roman  episcopacy  falls  to  the  ground.  If  the  gen- 
tleman admits  that  the  pope  has  as  much  authority  in  the  mountains 
of  the  moon  as  in  Rome,  why  all  this  controversy  about  Rome  ] 

The  gentleman  made  himself  very  merry  with  the  council's  depos- 
ing three  popes  and  creating  a  fourth.  But  I  repeat,  there  were  in  all 
four  popes  created  and  destroyed  at  that  one  time.  I  feel  no  mis- 
givings of  conscience  for  making  this  assertion.  I  ask  now,  how  are  we 
to  decide  which  of  these  four  had  the  best  title  to  St.  Peter's  chair  1 
Where  is  the  authority  for  a  council's  creating  one  and  destroying  three 
popes  1  No  council  before  ever  took  so  much  on  them.  But  if  we 
say  with  the  bishop,  that  not  one  of  the  three  popes  was  a  true  pope  i 
then  what  a  long  link  is  wanting  in  the  succession  ;  and  how  could 
the  council  of  Constance  furnish  it  1 

My  friend  the  bishop  spoke  of  marriage  quite  in  jocular  style — :  but 
he  told  one  great  truth  which  I  hope  he  will  stick  to,  to  the  end.  It  was 
this ;  He  said  that  the  church  had  made  marriage  one  of  the  seven 
sacraments — mark  it.  The  church  has  made  it  a  sacrament;  and  she 
has  made  other  things  sacraments :  which  the  great  universal  Father 
of  heaven  and  earth  has  not  so  made  and  designated. 

Peter  was  sent  to  convert  the  Gentiles. — He  opened  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  to  Cornelius  and  his  family :  but  this  does  not  interfere 
with  his  being  specially  the  apostle  of  the  Jews. 

There  were  various  vacancies  in  the  Roman  see  of  shorter  and 
longer  duration — several  of  two  or  three  years'  continuance.  The 
church  was  often  without  a  head  for  years  at  a  time. 

Was  it  the  intention  of  the  great  Author  of  the  christian  institution 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  155 

to  hfzard  su;h  a  continorency  1  Would  he  have  set  on  foot  such  an 
order  of  tilings  ? — The  chair  often  vacant  and  often  filled  with  wicked 
popes.  Now,  if  the  church  could  get  al»ng  for  years  without  a  pope, 
could  it  not  dispense  with  one  altogether'?  For  if  faith  in  the  pope 
be  an  essential  part  of  the  failh,  would  Jesus  Christ  have  suffered 
the  whole  administration  of  the  affairs  of  salvation  to  be  so  often  and 
so  long  suspended  ?  How  many  persons  were  born  and  died  during 
these  vacancies !  How  many  souls  were  detained  in  purgatory ;  and 
otherwise  endangered  in  their  spiritual  interests  by  these  unavoidable 
uiterruptions ! — [Time  expired.] 

Twelve  o'clock,  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

The  question  for  to-day  is  the  uniformity  of  the  Catholic  faith  and 
practice ;  and  we  are  still  upon  the  subject  of  apostolicity.  Mr.  C. 
cannot  go  ahead  as  fast  as  he  anticipated.  He  has  discovered  that 
Paulicians,  Donatists  and  Novatians  have  the  bar  sinister  on  their  coal 
of  arms,  and  he  takes  up  with  the  Vaudois,  for  whom  Reynier  and  Wad- 
dington  have  said  a  good  word.  Well  let  us  hear  the  latter,  as  he  is  a 
Protestant.  I  may  not  quote,  if  I  can  avoid  it,  Catholic  testimony,  p. 
290.  "  At  the  same  time  we  must  admit  that  the  direct  historical  evi- 
dence is  not  sufficient  to  prove  the  apostolical  descent  of  the  Vaudois." 
There  !  the  chain  of  evidence  breaks  off  right  short;  and  the  Novatians, 
Donatists  and  Paulicians  cannot  weld  it.  "  Besides,"  says  our  histo- 
rian, "  while  they  (the  Vaudois)  obliged  their  clergy  to  be  poor  and 
industrious,  they  compelled  them  to  be  illiterate  also."  This,  at  least, 
my  friend  will  condemn. 

He  says,  I  have  slept  and  dreamed  for  two  nights  on  the  subject  of 
my  testimony,  concerning  Osius'  presiding,^  in  the  name  of  Sylvester, 
at  the  council  of  Nice.  But  have  I  not  already  produced  Barojiius, 
and  have  there  not  been  for  the  last  two  days  of  this  debate,  other  re- 
spectable authorities  on  the  table,  modestly  waiting  to  be  heard  1  He 
said  I  could  not  get  a  single  proof  earlier  than  the  fifth  century,  and 
then,  that  the  reason  why  Osius  presided  in  the  councils  was  the  want 
of  learning  in  that  age,  in  the  East.  Why,  when  my  friend  says  this 
he  admits  all,  himself,  and  leaves  me  nothing  to  say.  But  the 
fourth  century  was  the  golden  age  of  the  whole  church.  There  were 
many  learned  men,  not  only  in  the  West  but  in  the  East,  and  if  he  will 
consult  Baronius,  he  will  find  that  there  has  rarely  been  presented  to 
the  veneration  of  the  Catholic  world  as  bright  an  array  of  great  and 
good  men,  as  that,  which  in  325,  assembled  in  the  council  at  Nice^ 
and  Du  Pin  encore.  He  makes  for  me.  He  does  say  that  Victor  and 
Vincentius,  were  legates  of  Sylvester. 

To  give  more  solemnity,  and  if  possible,  more  complete  effect  to  their 
decision,  the  bishops  of  the  Christian  world  met  to  banish  Ariaiiism 
and  establish  the  grand  cardinal  doctrine  of  the  divinity  of  Christ, 
which  the  Arians  impugned.  Constantine  was  there  ;  but  he  acknow- 
ledged the  distinctness  of  the  ecclesiastical  authority.  We  hear  of  no 
collision  between  him  and  Sylvester,  or  any  of  the  Nicene  bishops. 
The  church  was  in  no  absolute  want  of  his  aid,  but  as  it  was  freely 
given,  it  was  gratefully  accepted.  There  were  no  canals,  rail-roads, 
or  hotels  in  those  days.  In  the  emperor's  munificence,  the  fathers 
of  Nice  found  those  resourc-^s  which  their  poverty  denied  them.     To 


156  DEBATE    ON    THE 

his  son  Constantins,  it  was,  however,  that  Osius  fearlessTy  said,  "  Do 
not  interfere  in  ecclesiastical  matters,  for  to  you  God  g-ave  the  empire  ; 
but  to  us  ecclesiastical  concerns.  Now  as  he  who  should  deprive  you 
of  your  kingdom  would  resist  the  ordinance  of  God,  so  do  you  beware 
lest  you  fall  into  some  grievous  sir^  by  taking  away  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  church. 

My  learned  friend  says  he  will  not  go  further  on  these  matters.  It 
is  well— discretion  is  the  better  part  of  valor.  The  voice  of  all  anti- 
quity has  spoken — ^The  authority  of  Rome  has  ever  stood  preemi- 
nent. 

I  did  not  say,  I  did  not  doubt  these  popes  were  in  hell.  I  beg  the 
gentleman  to  quote  me  correctly.  Far  be  it  from  me,  to  arrogate  a 
right  which  belongs  to  God  alone,  to  decide  on  man's  eternal  destiny 
— but  I  said,  I  shout d  not  be  surprised,  at  it,  when  I  consider  their  de- 
fects and  sins  on  the  one  hand,  their  knowledge,  responsibility  and 
grace,  on  the  other.  The  more  eminent  their  station,  the  more  con- 
spicuous to  the  whole  world,  like  spots  on  the  sun,  were  their  frail- 
ties— the  brighter  the  example  of  their  predecessors,  the  darker,  by 
contrast,  did  they  appear.  But  the  circumstances  of  the  times  in 
which  they  lived,  must  be  taken  into  the  account  to  palliate,  if  truth  v.il] 
not  permit  us  to  excuse,  their  failings.  The  Hghts  and  skadoics  are 
blended,  perhaps  necessarily,  in  the  moral  as  well  as  in  the  physical 
world  ;  and  as  we  do  not  deny  the  existence  of  an  infinitely  wise  and 
good  God,  because  we  discover  apparent  imperfection  in  the  material 
world,  the  volcano,  the  poison,  the  venomous  reptile,  the  whirlwind, 
the  pestilential  malaria,  so  neither  do  we  conclude  that  religion,  or  tho 
church,  is  not  his  work,  because  we  sometimes  meet  with  examples  of 
moral  deformity  and  disorder  which  mar  the  beauty  of  the  heavenly 
design.  But  Mr.  C.  thinks  that  God  would  never  allow  men  whom 
he  had  selected  for  the  high  function  of  "Roman  Catholic  popes,  to  fall 
into  sins  that  would  merit  for  ttem  hell-fire.  Does  he  then  forget  that 
God  created  Lucifer,  as  a  bright  leader  of  the  angelic  throng,  and  yet 
Lucifer  is  now  a  reprobate  spirit  in  hell?  Does  he  forget  that  Judas 
was  selected  to  share  in  the  inf\illibility,  which  he  allows  was  granted 
to  the  twelve  1  Did  not  Jesus  train  him  up  in  his  own  school  for  three 
years?  And  did  not  Judas,  after  all,  betray  his  God  and  sell  him  for 
the  thirty  pieces  of  silver?  Did  he  not  afterwards  go  and  hang  him- 
self in  despair,  and  his  bowels  gushed  out.  Was  it  not  because  of  the 
excess  of  his  own  favor  to  Judas,  and  the  inconceivable  ingratitude  of 
the  apostle,  that  the  Son  of  God  had  said  by  the  mouth  of  his  prophet : 
Ps.  liv.  14.  "If  my  enemy  had  reviled  me,  I  would  verily  have  borne 
with  it,  and  if  he  that  hated  me,  had  spoken  great  things  against  me, 
I  would  perhaps  have  hidden  myself  from  him:  but  thou,  a  man  of  one 
mind,  my  guide  and  my  familiar^  This  is  what  makes  a  priest's, 
or  a  bishop's  sin  so  great.  This,  awful  as  it  is,  is  what  sustains  us 
when  scandals  befall  the  church,  when  the  lights  of  the  sanctuary  are 
eclipsed  and  its  pillars  broken  and  scattered  on  the  earth,  for  we  say 
to  ourselves  Christ  has  allowed  all  this  beforehand  in  that  miniature 
band,  his  own  apostles — the  exemplar  of  his  church  :  and  the  number 
of  hod  pitpes  has  not  yet  equalled  the  proportion  rf  one  to  twehe  !  God 
h;is  allowed  all  this  to  teach  us,  that  if  men  fall  away,  the  faith  for 
which  his  holy  promises  are  pledged,  is  invincible.  "  The  gifts  of  God 
are  ivithout  repentance,''''  Rom.  xi.  29,  in  other  words,  Christ  established 


KOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  157 

the  primacy  of  Peter.  He  wished  it  to  persevere.  If  anj  of  the  sue* 
cessors  of  Peter  are  bad  men;  the  answer  of  Paul  comes  up,  "The 
gifts  of  God  are  without  repentance."  If  man  behaves  badly,  it  is  for 
his  own  ruin,  but  his  evil  conduct  shall  not  change  the  order  and  de- 
sign of  heaven. 

It  was  attempted  to  show  that  there  was  no  analogy  between  the 
ancestry  of  Christ,  and  the  succession  of  St.  Peter.  Now  I  maintain  that 
if  the  ancestry  of  Judah's  royal  line,  magnificent  as  it  was  and  des- 
tined to  be  the  forerunner  of  Him,of  whom  Paul  had  many  and  great 
things  and  hard  to  be  understood,  to  declare,  could  yet  include  some 
of  the  worst  sinners,  why  might  not  the  apostolical  succession,  ia 
which  was,  individually  or  collectively,  nought  so  holy  as  He  to  whom 
all  the  prophets  bore  witness,  in  whom  was  seen  on  earth,  all  the  glo- 
ry of  the  Father,  full  of  grace  and  truth  1 

I  refer  to  the  first  chapter  of  Matthew  where  the  temporal  genera- 
tion of  the  Savior  is  traced  from  David,  and  my  argument  is  this  ;  that 
as  it  has  not  impaired  the  sanctity  of  Jesus  to  come  according  to  the 
flesh,  from  him,  though  he  sinned,  and  from  others  who  sinned  as  he 
had  sinned,  so  neither  did  it  detract  from  the  sanctity  of  the  olfice  of 
pope,  that  there  were  some  bad  men  among  the  number.  The  cases 
are  therefore,  so  far  as  that  argument  is  concerned,  analogous;  and  we 
may  exclaim  with  a  holy  awe — Oh !  the  depth  of  the  riches,  and  of 
the  knowledge,  of  the  wisdom  of  God  !  How  incomprehensible  are 
his  judgments,  and  how  unsearchable  his  ways  !  Who  hath  known 
the  mind  of  God,  or  who  hath  been  his  counsellor]  St.  Paul,  Rom. 
xi.  33,  34.  My  friend  says  that  holy  men  were  always  selected  by  the 
Holy  Ghost  for  holy  purposes !  and  what  will  he  say  of  Luther,  who 
proves,  as  1  can  show  by  his  own  testimony,  himself  to  have  beer 
a  bad  man !  I  have  his  works  here  in  three  vols,  folio — a  Dajiiel 
come  to  judgment !  He  was  "  a  hard  wedge  to  split  knotty  blocks  !" 
&c.  Yes,  he  had  a  hard  mouth,  and  a  hard  heart.  But  I  will  not 
speak  of  Luther  nor  of  Calvin,  hard,  unless  compelled. 

The  gentleman  says  there  were  forty-nine  saints  in  the  first  fifty. 
I  said  there  were  39  who  were  saints  and  martyrs.  Since  that,  there 
lave  been  many  pontiffs,  saints.  Pius  the  7th  possessed  all  the  vir- 
tues which  may  entitle  him  to  be  so  considered.     So  did  his  predeces- 

jor  Pius  VI.  so  did  Benedict  XIV.  and  Pius  VIII.  and  Leo  XII So 

does  the  present  pontiff,  a  man  of  the  purest  morals,  profound  humil- 
ity, enlightened  zeal  and  eminent  learning.  We  have  heard  many 
silly  predictions  of  the  doctrine  of  his  temporal  influence  in  Rome, 
but  I  repeat  that  he  would  retain  his  spiritual  authority,  if  he  were 
compelled  to  leave  that  city,  which  I  hope  after  his  predecessors  have 
stood  tiieir  ground  for  eighteen  hundred  years  he  never  wiH.  His  au- 
thority does  not  reside  in  the  stones,  and  bricks  and  pavements  of 
Rome ! 

The  gentleman  speaks  of  the  schism  of  Avignon,  for  my  friend 
thinks  that  if  the  pope  should  leave  Rome,  the  Catholic  faith  would 
be  annihilated.  He  does  not  know  that  the  title  of  the  see  would 
follow  the  pope.  We  never  suflTer  even  the  name  of  a  see  to  perish. 
If  Christianity  forsake  a  country,  where  it  has,  once,  been  established 
the  names  of  the  sees  would  survive.  Thus  the  present,  learned  and 
pious  Coadjutor— bishop  of  Philadelphia,  takes  his  ecclesiastical  desig- 
nation from  Arath  in  partibus  infiddium.  The  titular  bishop  of  Phil- 
O 


i   )8  DEBATE    0?f    THE 

aJelphia  is  blind  fiom  his  great  age.  The  bishop  of  Bardsfown  is 
also,  nominally,  bishop  of  a  foreign  see. 

Now  let  me,  once  for  all,  say  that  my  friend  has  several  times  mis- 
taken my  views  and  words,  on  the  subject  of  appointment  to  office. 
I  need  not  repeat  what  I  have  said  on  that  subject.  We  do  nothing 
without  the  pope's  concurrence  and  sanction,  in  spiritual  matters. 
This  communion  is  a  peculiar  trait  in  our  church.  We  exult  in  it. 
It  keeps  us  together  as  the  sheep  of  one  fold.  "  He  who  ^raihereth 
not  with  me  scattereth,"  saith  the  Lord.  By  this  communion  with 
the  see  of  Peter,  we  know  that  the  church  is  orthodox  aad  sound. 
On  this  account  we  yield  all  due  deference  to  the  pope.  On  this  ac- 
count we  ask  of  him  the  "  canonical  investiture,"  which  signifies  that  a 
person  is  authorized  by  him  to  be  made  bishop,  and  inducted  into  the 
sacred  office  by  his  authority. 

We  were  told  that  councils  met  together  and  elected  popes.  There 
's  nothing  extraordinary  in  this.  Why,  my  dear  friends,  com.non  sense 
teaches  this  course.  Christ's  foreknowledge  of  all  the  occurrences 
that  were  to  take  place  in  the  government  of  the  earth,  caused  him  to 
organize  society.  If  not,  disorder  would  ensue.  On  such  ?.  principle 
as  the  gentleman's,  there  could  be  no  common  bond  of  union.  If  Christ's 
society  in  the  world  and  men  will  not  consent  to  be  held  together  by 
Bocial  rules,  his  design  is  baffled.  The  church  is  a  societJ^  Hence 
St.  Paul  says,  "Let  every  soul  be  subject  to  the  higher  powers,  for 
they  who  resist,  purchase  for  themselves  damnation."  Rom.  xiii.  1. 
Again,  "  Remember  your  prelates  who  have  spoken  to  you  the  word 
of  God  ;  whose  faith  follow,  considering  the  end  of  their  conversation." 
And  again  "  obey  your  prelates,  and  be  subject  to  them.  For  they 
watch  as  being  to  render  an  account  of  your  souls,  that  they  may  do 
this  with  joy  and  not  with  grief.  For  this  is  not  expedient  for  you." 
Heb.  xiii.  17.  Without  subordination  there  can  be  no  peace,  and 
consequently  no  happiness,  in  any  society  of  men,  but  particularly  in 
a  religious  society.  The  church  is  the  pillar  and  the  ground  of  the 
truth,  1st  Tim.  iii.  15.     [Time  expired.] 

Three  o'clock^  P.  M, 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

Before  the  third  proposition  is  read,  I  beg  leave  to  offer  both  an  ex- 
planation and  an  apology. 

In  reference  to  the  proposition  which  has  just  been  discussed,  1 
have  lying  before  me  an  index  of  the  popes  from  the  time  of  Peter  to 
Innocent  II.  A.  D.  1676.  Here  are  two  hundred  and  forty  popes.  In 
the  first  fifty,  forty-nine  were  saints.  We  notice  a  diminution  in  sanc- 
tity as  we  descend  to  our  own  times ;  for  in  the  last  ninety  popes  on 
the  list,  there  is  only  one  saint.  The  church  made  her  own  saints. 
She  ought,  therefore,  to  know  the  reason  why.  It  rests  in  her  own 
judgment:  but,  in  my  judgment,  she  has  made  in  her  popes  e.s  many 
as,  in  any  decency,  she  possibly  could  ;  and  many  more  in  name  than 
she 'even  had  in  reality. 

The  gentleman  (and  it  was  one  of  his  most  lucky  hits)  compares  the 
fact  that  there  was  one  traitor  among  twelve  apostles,  to  the  fact,  that 
there  were  fifty  bad  popes  among  two  or  three  hundred  popes.  This 
is  a  happy  salvo.  Judas  has  relieved  many  a  hard  case ;  but  the  con- 
duct of  Judas  is  no  apology  for  the  popes.  It  has  another  meniiiiig  it 
scripture,  than  to  justify  or  excuse  such  flagitious  cases.    The  Savior 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    HELIGIOK.  159 

you  will  rein  ember,  in  his  prayer  (John  xvii.),  says :  "  Of  all  thou  hast 
given  me  I  have  lo'st  only  one,  the  son  of  perdition ;"  because  he  was 
spoken  of  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  described  as  a  traitor.  The  use  rf 
Judas  among  the  twelve,  is  not  always  duly  appreciated.  But  for 
him,  as  respects  the  credibility  of  the  testimony,  it  might  have  been 
said,  that  the  twelve  apostles  were  all  the  personal  friends  of  Christ ; 
and,  although  persons  of  fair  reputation,  yet  their  testimony  was  that 
of  friends.  To  prevent  this  reflection,  and  to  make  it  perfect  in  every 
point  of  view,  one  enemy  is  made  the  confidant  of  Jesus,  as  much  as 
any  one  of  them.  He  is  admitted  to  all  the  secrets  of  the  schemes  of 
the  Messiah,  as  much  as  his  other  companions.  He  is  a  covetous 
wretch,  and  sells  his  master  for  fifteen  dollars.  Yet,  under  the  con- 
viction of  his  guilt,  after  a  little  reflection,  he  goes  to  the  high  priest, 
and  makes  confession  of  his  sin,  saying:  '*  I  have  betrayed  innocent 
blood."  This,  at  this  crisis,  in  all  the  circumstances,  is  the  best  tes- 
timony of  the  twelve.  It  was  essenti?J  to  the  consummation  of  the 
testimony  against  the  imputation  of  collusion  amongst  his  friends ;  and 
Judas  is  as  much  a  martyr  to  the  truth  of  Christianity,  as  any  one  of 
his  companions  :  a  nnartyr,  indeed,  not  to  his  own  honor,  but  to  the 
blameless  reputation  of  the  author  and  founder  of  the  christian  faith. 
This,  then,  explains  the  reason  of  such  a  permission  in  that  case.  But, 
hearken  to  the  sequel.  To  prevent  a  bad  use  of  such  a  permission  or 
allowance  even,  the  Lord  suggested  to  his  disciples  to  cast  lots — to 
appeal  to  heaven  in  electing  a  successor  to  Judas,  that  they  might  not 
be  endangered  in  the  reputation  of  another  apostle,  and  that  he  might 
be  sent  from  God.  To  have  permitted  persons  of  this  character  to 
stand  forward  in  the  front  rank  of  the  gospel,  would  have  endangered 
the  cause.  The  delinquency  of  the  popes  is  opposed  to  the  plan  and 
government  of  the  christian  institution ;  and  had  it  not  been  for  the 
reputation  of  the  Roman  clergy,  we  cannot  tell  how  much  more  the 
cause  of  Christ  would  have  triumphed  ere  now.  This  is  the  eocplor 
nation. 

Now,  for  the  apology.  It  is  for  the  difficulties,  which  our  worthy 
friend  had  to  encounter  in  finding  a  succession  in  the  bishops  of  Rome, 
that  we  offer  an  apology.  This  apology  ought  to  be  a  part  of  this  book, 
for  the  sake  of  a  particular  class,  who  have  not  leisure  to  trace  the 
causes  of  these  things. 

The  bishop  could  find  no  testimony  in  behalf  of  Peter's  having  had 
the  see  of  Rome ;  because  that  was  not  the  ground  on  which  that  see 
first  claimed  the  supremacy  :  if  it  hsd,  we  should  have  had  plenty  of 
old  traditions  to  sustain  it.  The  ancient  and  true  ground  of  ascribing 
to  the  bishop  of  Rome  superior  importance,  and  of  his  arrogating  any 
sort  of  superiority  over  other  bishops,  was,  that  his  see  was  the  impe- 
rial city  :  not  because  Peter  or  Paul  had  ever  been  bishop  of  Rome. 
Rome  was  mistress  of  the  World,  the  metropolis  of  the  empire,  the 
great  city,"  the  emperor's  residence.  The  bishop  of  Rome,  moreover, 
had  the  richest  church  in  the  world,  and  most  honorable  diocese ;  and 
being  neighbor  to  the  emperor,  he  became  proud  :  for,  said  he  to  him- 
self, "  As  the  emperor  governs  the  whole  world,  so  ought  /to  govern 
the  whole  church."     From  such  seeds  sprung  the  apostolic  tree  ! 

Constantine  became  a  Christian  :  Byzantium  is  changred  into  Con- 
stantinople :  the  Constantine  family  take  up  their  residence  there  :  it 
begirs  to  be  called  New  Rome;  and  with  that  began  the  rivalry  be* 


160  DEBATE    OX    THE 

tween  old  and  new  Rome.  Soon  there  are  two  empires  (for  the  empire 
was  diviJed),  one  of  the  east,  and  one  of  the  west.  There  must  be, 
now,  two  great  impe^rial  bishops;  and  the  east  and  west  churches,  or, 
the  Greek  and  Roman,  began  to  feel  the  spirit  of  rival  aggrandizement. 
The  controversy  began,  and  the  prospects  of  the  new  city  outrivaled 
those  of  the  old  city.  But,  just  as  the  sceptre  and  mitre  were  about 
passing  from  Rome  to  Constantinople,  some  ingenious  person,  whose 
name  no  monument  records,  thought  of  a  happy  expedient  to  save  the 
sinking  fortunes  of  the  eternal  city.  It  was,  that  Peter  and  Paul  had 
founded  the  church  of  Rome  :  nay,  that  Peter  and  Paul  were  buried 
there ! 

Constantina,  the  empress  of  the  east,  at  the  close  of  the  sixth  cen- 
tury, finding  that  this  discovery  was  unfortunate  to  the  rising  majesty 
of  the  east,  sent  an  express  to  Rome  to  obtain  the  remains  of  Paul,  and 
have  them  conveyed  to  Constantinople.  She  was  willing  that  Peter 
should  remain  in  the  Latoran  ;  but  she  wished  to  possess  Paul.  She 
thought  this  would  equalize  the  pretensions  of  new  Rome  and  old 
Rome,  and  give  her  equal  claims  upon  the  devotion  of  the  saints  and 
pilgrims  of  the  church.  Had  it  not  been  for  her  failure  in  this  strata- 
gem, no  one  can  tell  whether  Rome  had  not  been,  ages  since,  like 
Thebes  or  Babylon.    On  this  subject,  thus  speaks  the  elegant  Gibbon  : 

"  Like  Thebes,  or  Babylon,  or  Carthage,  llie  name  of  Rome  iiii"lif  have  bteii 
erased  from  the  eaj-th,  if  the  city  had  not  been  animated  by  a  vital  principle 
which  ag^in  restored  her  to  honor  and  domin'on.  A  vague  tradition  was  embraced 
that  two  Jewish  teachers,  a  tent-maker  and  a  lishernian,  had  formerly  been  exe 
cuted  in  the  circus  of  JVero,  and  at  the  end  of  five  hundred  years  their  genuine 
or  fictitious  relics  were  adored  as  the  palladium  of  christian  Rome."  Dec!,  and 
Fall  Rom.  Emp.  Vol.  viii.  p.  161. 

*■'■  A  vague  tradition."  This  is  happily  expressed.  But  the  superior 
tact  of  St.  Gregory  saved  Rome  from  this  misfortune;  and  he  managed 
the  petition  of  Constantina  with  great  address,  as  we  shall  presently 
show.     I  beg  leave  "to  read  from  Waddington: 

Reverence  Jbr  Relics.  The  empress  Constantia,  who  was  building  a  church 
at  Constantinople  to  St.  Paul,  made  application  to  Gregory  for  the  head  of  that 
Apostle,*  oral  least  for  some  portion  of  his  body.  The  pope  beoins  his  answer 
by  a  very  polite  expression  of  his  sorrow  *  that  he  neither  could  nor  dared  to 
grant  that  favor;  for  the  bodies  of  the  holy  apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  are  so 
resplendent  with  miracles  and  terrific  prodigies  in  iheir  own  churches,  tliat  no 
one  can  approach  them  without  great  awe,  even  for  the  purpose  of  adoring  them. 
When  my  predecessor,  of  happy  memory,  wished  to  change  some  silver  arma- 
ment which  was  placed  over  the  most  lioly  body  of  St.  Peter,  though  at  the 
distance  of  almost  fifteen  feet,  a  warning  of  no  small  terror  appeared  to  him. 
Even. I  myself  wished  to  make  some  alteration  near  the  most  holy  body  of  St. 
Paul,  and  it  was  necessary  to  dig  rather  deeply  near  his  tomb.  The  superior  of 
tlie  place  tbund  some  bones  which  were  not  at  all  connected  with  that  tomb:  and 
having  presumed  to  disturb  and  remove  them  to  some  other  place,  he  was  visited 
by  certain  fearful  apparitions,  and  died  suddenly.  My  predecessor,  of  holy 
luennory,  also  undertook  to  make  some  repairs  iie&r  the  tomb  of  St.  Laurence: 
as  they  were  digging  without  knowing  precisely  where  the  venerable  body  wai 
placed,  they  happened  to  open  his  sepulchre.  The  monks  and  guardians  who 
were  at  the  work,  only  because  they  had  seen  the  bodv  of  that  martyr,  though 
ihey  did  not  presume  so  much  as  to  touch  it,  all  died  within  ten  days;  to  the  end 
that  no  man  might  remain  in  life  who  had  beheld  the  body  of  that  just  man. 

*  Baronius,  who  cites  the  pope's  reply  with  considerable  admiration,  attributes  the  em 
press's  exorbitant  request  to  ecctcsisslical  ambition, — to  a  desire  to  exah  the  see  of  Con 
Htantinople  to  a  level  with  that  of  Rome,  by  getting  into  lier  [wssession  so  imporinnt  a  por 
tion  of  so  great  an  apostle.  Fleury  quotes  the  letter  chiefly  in  proof  iha!  the  transfer  d 
relics  was  forbidden  in  the  Roman  church,  while  that  abuse  was  oermittcd  in  the  east. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  161 

Be  it  then  known  to  you,  that  it  is  the  custom  of  the  Romans,  when  they  give 
any  rel.cs,  not  to  venture  to  touch  any  portion  of  the  body;  only  they  pat  into 
a  box  apiece  of  linen  (called  brandeum,)  which  is  placed  near  the  holy  bodies; 
then  it  IS  withdrawn  and  shut  up  with  due  veneratior.  in  the  church  which  is 
to  be  dedicated,  and  as  many  prodigies  are  then  wrought  by  it  as  if  the  bodies 
thenigelves  had  been  carried  thither;  whence  it  happened,  tliat  in  the  times  of  St. 
Leo,  (as  we  learn  from  our  ancestors,)  when  some  Greeks  doubted  the  virtue  of 
such  relics,  that  pope  called  for  a  pair  of  scissors,  and  cut  the  linen,  and  blood 
flowed  from  the  i  icision.  And  not  at  Rome  only,  but  through  the  whole  of  the 
west,  it  is  held  sacrilegious  to  touch  the  bodies  of  the  saints,  nor  does  such  te- 
merity ever  rema  n  unpunished.  For  which  reason  we  are  much  astonished  at 
the  custom  of  the  Greeks  to  take  away  the  bones  of  the  saints,  and  we  scarcely 
give  credit  to  it.  But  what  shall  I  say  respecting  the  bodies  of  the  holy  apostles 
when  it  is  a  known  fact,  that  at  the  time  of  their  martyrdom,  a  number  of  the 
faitliful  came  from  the  east  to  claim  them?  But  when  they  had  carried  them  out 
af  the  city,  to  the  second  nkilestone,  to  a  place  called  the  catacombs,  the  whole 
multitude  was  unable  to  move  them  farther, — such  a  tempest  of  thunder  and 
lightning  terrified  and  dispersed  them. 

The  napkin  too,  which  you  wished  to  be  sent  at  the  same  time,  is  with  the  body 
and  cannot  be  touched  more  than  the  body  can  be  approached.  But  that  your 
religious  desire  may  not  be  wholly  frustrated,  I  will  hasten  to  send  \o  you  some 
part  of  those  chains  which  St.  Paul  wore  on  the  neck  and  hands,  if  indeed  I 
shall  succeed  in  getting  off  any  filings  from  them.  For  since  many  continually 
solicit  as  a  blessing  that  they  may  carry  off  from' those  chains  some  small  portioo 
of  their  filings,  a  priest  stands  by  with  a  file;  and  sometimes  it  happens  that 
some  portions  fall  off  from  the  chains  instantly  and  without  delay ;  while  at  other 
times,  the  file  is  long  drawn  over  the  chains,  and  yet  nothing  is  at  last  scraped 
off  from  them."     Wad.  Chh.  Hist,  passes  140,  141. 

By  this  rhetoric,  the  bodies  of  Paul  and  Peter  were  saved  for  Rome. 
And  thus,  when  she  lost  the  government  of  the  world,  and  ceased  to 
be  the  imperial  city,  she  had  a  better  argument  for  her  supremacy  than 
before.  But,  had  this  been  thought  of  a  few  centuries  sooner,  my 
opponent  would  have  been  able  to  confound  me  with  a  h6st  of  tradi- 
tionary witnesses,  assuring  us  that  Peter  was  made  bishop  of  Rome 
and  universal  father  of  the  whole  church. 

[Mr.  C.  here  called  for  the  reading  of  the  third  proposition,  which 
was  read  by  one  of  the  moderators.] 

Prop.  III.  "She  is  not  uniform  in  her  faith,  nor  united  in  her  members;  but 
mutable  and  fallible,  as  anv  other  sect  of  philosophy  or  religion — Jewish,  Turk- 
ish, or  Christian — a  confecferation  of  sects,  under  a  politico-ecclesiastic  head." 

I  will  proceed  to  define  some  of  these  terms.  It  is  truly  alleged 
that  most  controversies  are  mere  logomachies ;  and  that  perspicuous 
and  precise  definitions  would  settle  a  great  number  of  them  can  not 
be  doubted. — 

To  narrow  the  debate  on  this  proposition,  the  Roman  church  claims 
universal  homage  on  the  plea  of  unity  and  uniformity,  as  resulting 
from  infallibility.  Every  other  church  is  mutable  and  fallible :  but 
she  is  immutably  the  same  !  Why  1  Because  infallible.  Infallible  in 
what  respect?  Infallible  in  faith  and  in  morals;  but  not  in  discipline. 
But  where  shall  this  infallibility  be  found  1  In  any  individual  per- 
son ?  No;  nor  in  all  individual  persons  taken  singly.  But  she  is 
infallible  in  her  faith  and  morals,  as  written  in  her  creed  !  The  Pro- 
testant church  is  then  just  as  infallible  as  the  Roman  church  :  for  her 
faith  and  moral  code  are  written  in  a  book  which  is  the  fountain  of 
all  moral  truth.  We  must  then  define  faith :  and  let  me  ask,  Avhat 
does  the  gentleman  mean  by  faifh  ?  persuasion  of  a  f;ict,  doctrine,  or 
opinion]  It  cannot  include  everything.  If  faith  mean  with  him, 
something  in  the  head  or  heart ;  then,  where  is  the  pie-emiuence  ol  ina 
0  2  11 


162  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Roman  church,  whose  members  individually  are  all  fallible  1  and  if  it 
be  faith  as  written  in  the  creed  :  again,  I  would  ask,  where  is  the 
preeminence  of  the  Roman  church,  over  the  English  church?  for  she 
is  as  infallible  in  hei  creed  as  the  Bible  itself. 

The  gentleman  says,  '  that  the  symbol  of  his  faith  is  the  apostles'* 
creed.''  Ifthat  be  the  elements  of  his  faith  ;  all  Protestants  believe  it : 
but  if  he  means  doctrine,  opinion,  speculation ;  then  folios  would  not 
contain  the  differences.  What  is  faith  subjectively  considered,  but  a 
belief  in  testimony,  divine  or  human  1  and  what  is  religious  faith  ob- 
jectively, but  the  Bible  ?  Five  words  comprehend  the  order  of  things 
in  regard  to  faith :  1st  the  fact,  or  the  thing  said  or  done — 2nd  the 
testimony,  concerning  it — 3rd  the  belief  of  that  testifnony — 4th  the 
feeling,  consentaneous  with  that  faith — and  5th  the  action,  correspond- 
ing with  that  feeling. — ^These  are  the  golden  links,  in  that  divine  chain, 
which  binds  our  hearts  to  God,  and  explains  all  the  mysteries  of  the 
moral  power  of  the  remedial  scheme.  The  gospel  facts,  as  Paul 
sums  them  up,  1  Cor.  xv.  1,  2,  3,  which  engross  the  whole,  are  the 
death,  the  burial  and  the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  The  whole  Protestant 
world  believes  these  facts.  England,  Scotland,  America — all  Christen- 
dom believe,  or  acknowledge  these  great  gospel  facts.  So  far  all  are 
of  one  faith.  The  Romanist  and  Protestant  here,  are  equally  infallible 
as  respects  faith !  And  do  we  not  all  acknowledge  the  same  perfect 
moral  code  ?  But  while  there  is,  indeed,  but  one  faith,  there  are  many 
doctrines,  opinions,  and  traditions ;  and  these  are  what  make  the 
"  Bible'''  and  the  "  One  Faith''  of  the  Bible  of  little  or  no  account ! 
Hence,  has  not  the  Roman  church,  like  the  Jews,  made  void  the  law 
of  God  by  her  traditions  %  It  is  not  because  the  scriptures  do  not 
contain  the  right  faith :  but  because  men  have  chosen  to  add  to  it* 
folios  of  human  opinions,  that  the  divine  faith  has  lost  its  power. 

It  is  a  serious  question,  why  is  the  Roman  church  infallible  in  faith 
and  not  in  discipline  7 — in  theory,  and  not  in  practice  1  in  the  head, 
and  not  in  the  heart  ? — Is  it  not  of  more  value  and  importance,  that 
she  should  be  perfect  in  the  order  and  moral  discipline  of  her  mem- 
bers ;  than  in  the  theory  or  doctrine  of  religion  1  She  found  that  she 
never  could  make  herself  infallible — why  then,  does  she  choose  to 
claim  infallibility  in  the  theory,  and  give  it  up  in  practice  1  Because 
her  plea  of  infallibility  on  that  ground,  she  well  knew,  she  could  not 
at  all  sustain ;  and  how  well  she  can  sustain  it  on  other  grounds  will 
appear  in  the  sequel.  She  has  changed  her  discipline  in  every  cen- 
tury ;  and  her  theories  and  doctrines  of  order  and  government  are  as 
various  as  the  Protestant  sects.  In  the  19th  century,  she  is  not  the 
same  as  in  the  18th;  nor  in  the  18th  as  in  the  17th,  nor  in  the  17th 
as  in  the  16th,  &c. 

My  friend  has  made  concessions  here,  which  I  never  expected  front 
him.  He  has  avowed  principles,  which,  till  within  a  few  years,  were 
onknown  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church.  I  look  upon  this  fact  as  an 
evidence,  that  better  dajs  are  coming.  I  could  wish  that  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic faith,  under  the  mild  genius  of  our  institutions,  might  become  so 
modified,  as  to  be  suited  to  the  character  of  our  republic;  especially 
to  abandon  the  absurd  pretension  of  infallibility,  which  indeed,  she 
must  do,  if  ever  she  can  become  American. 

But  th?  Roman  church  is  not  united,  nor  uniform  in  this  notion  of 
infallibility.  There  are  four  theories  and  four  parties  on  the  question, 
where  shall  infallibility  be  found  ?   The  gentleman  believes  that  the 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  1G3 

pope  is  as  fallible  as  himself.  This,  I  conceive,  is  not  the  oomraoa 
belief  among  Roman  Catholics.  The  .Tesuits,  if  I  am  rightly  inform- 
ed, teach  that  infallibility  must,  of  right,  be  in  the  head.  Indeed,  so 
1  should  reason :  for  what  use  would  be  an  infallible  body  under  a 
fallible  head  ■?  and  would  not  that  be  most  unnatural  ]  Is  not  the  body 
subject  to  the  head,  naturally  and  necessarily  1  and  ought  not  every 
body  political  and  ecclesiastic,  like  the  natural  body,  to  be  governed 
by  its  head  T — [Time  expired.] 

Half  past  3  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

I  woultl  prefer,  for  the  satisfaction  of  the  audience,  and  to  do  the 
iubject  justice,  to  enter  at  once  on  the  proposition  of  the  infallibility 
of  the  Church.  I  should  go  over  the  ground,  my  learned  opponent 
has  traveled,  and  if  permitted,  should  make  a  regular  argument  on 
the  subjects  to  which  he  has  alluded.  My  good  friend  is  dissatisfied 
with  himself  for  having  made  any  concessions  in  favor  of  the  purity 
of  the  popes,  and  he  has  re-examined,  and  found  for  the  last  ninety 
years  but  one  saint  in  the  calendar.  If  there  was  but  one  can- 
onized, does  it  follow  that  there  was  but  one  worthy  ]  There  were 
many  worthy.  There  have  been  many  great  and  good  men  among 
the  popes  who  have  not  been  canonized.  Rome  is  very  particular 
whom  she  proposes  as  models  for  her  children's  imitation.  She  is 
anxious  that  there  should  be  no  blemish  in  the  splendor  of  holiness, 
no  faded  flower  in  her  coronal.  She  must  be  so  w^U  assured  by  the 
evidence  of  facts  and  miracles  of  the  eminent  virtue  with  which  it 
has  pleased  God  to  endow  the  subject  whose  life  is  examined  with 
reference  to  this  holy  distinction,  that  she  has  appointed  a  personage  in 
Rome,  called  the  Devil's  Advocate,  whose  duty  it  is  when  a  candi- 
date is  proposed  for  beatification,  to  rake  up  all  he  can  against  him, 
and  thus  prevent,  not  his  entrance  into  heaven  exactly,  but  the  admis- 
sion of  his  name  into  the  calendar  of  saints.  So  that,  what  an  illustrious 
Protestant  has  said,  "  it  is  a  miracle  to  prove  a  miracle  at  Rome,"  is 
in  fact,  a  proverb  in  the  Ancient  City. 

Well,  now,  my  friend  says  that  it  was  necessary  that  there  should 
be  a  Judas, — that  he  was  mentioned  in  the  Old  Testament — his  is  a 
special  case — unique.  But  my  argument  is  so  strong  on  this  point, 
that  I  will  give  up  even  the  strong  case  of  Judas,  and  yet  prevail. 
Even  Peter,  with  oaths,  denied  the  knowledge  of  his  God  and  .Savior 
Jesus  Christ.  The  other  apostles  also  abandoned  him — a  crime,  be 
it  noted,  which  the  Novatians  would  have  never  pardoned.  Jll  fins 
was  foretold  as  well  as  the  particular  instance  of  Judas.  So  that,  if 
he  please,  I  will  abandon  this  particular  case,  and  argue  as  follows  : 

Peter  fell  and  was  resuscitated ;  the  rest  of  the  apostles  fled ;  they 
were  ashamed,  or  afraid,  of  being  thought  the  disciples  of  Christ. 
They  were  not,  however,  rejected.  The  gifts  of  God  were  without  re- 
pentance in  their  regard,  who  having  seen  and  conversed  with  the 
vVord  made  Flesh,  witnessed  his  miracles,  and  beheld  the  example 
of  his  virtues,  were,  therefore,  to  human  judgment,  less  excusable 
for  their  desertion  of  the  stricken  Shepherd.  Why  may  not,  at  least, 
equal  mercy  be  extended,  if  not  to  the  popes,  who  were  in  this  re- 
spect less  highly  favored,  at  least,  to  the  doctrine  of  truth  which  the 
apostles,  and  the  popes  were  appointed  to  announce  and  to  preserve 
ainong  men  1     Must  God's  holy  law  be  broken  to  pieces,  and  truth 


164  DEBATE    ON    THE 

perish  from  the  earth,  because  there  have  been  had  men,  like  Aaron, 
who  bow  to  the  golden  calf — to  their  passions'?  It  is  beliered  by 
some  to  have  been  specially  ordained  by  the  good  providence  of  God, 
that  Rome,  once  the  mistress  of  the  entire  Pagan  world,  should  be 
forever  the  chief  see  of  the  Christian  world  ;  thus  verifying  the  almost 
prophetic  words  of  one  of  her  most  gifted  minds,  "  that  the  sun  in 
his  course  cannot  behold  any  thing  greater."  We  are  told  a  fine  sto 
ry  about  Constantia — like  some  less  ancient  rivals  of  the  see  of  Pe- 
ter, she  was  three  hundred  years  too  late  to  establish  any  claim  to 
the  headship  of  the  church,  and  especially  by  such  means,  in  favor 
of  Constantinople.  Now,  my  friends,  why  did  Constantia  want  to 
have  the  head  of  Paul  at  Constantinople]  It  was  because  it  was 
known  that  from  the  beginning  Rome  had  possessed  the  prescriptive 
right  to  the  chief  honor  and  authority,  not  only  in  the  temporal,  but 
likewise  in  the  spiritual  kingdom.  The  seal  of  temporal  power  had 
been  transferred  to  Constantinople;  but  the  see  of  ecclesiastical " su- 
premacy was  still  at  Rome,  and  like  another  Queen  of  lofty  and  arro- 
gant pretensions,  Constantia  aspired  to  reign  supreme,  in  Religion  as 
well  as  in  Politics.  According  to  the  ideas  of  that  time  which  show  in 
what  veneration  relics  were  held,  she  could  set  up  no  good  claim  for 
the  spiritual  independence  of  Constantinople,  unless  she  had  the  head 
of  St.  Paul  brought  from  Rome,  and  in  this  she  failed. 

Gibbon  says,  and  it  is  one  of  the  few  sterling  truths  he  ever  sai<l, 
(though  it  is  a  buy)  that  Rome  would  have  perished  amidst  so  many 
revolutions,  if  she  had  not  had  within  her  a  vital  principle.  This 
reminds  me  of  what  my  worthy  antagonist  said  in  the  Presbyterian 
church,  quoting  a  French  physician,  during  the  session  of  the  College 
of  Teachers,  "  that  we  might  live  forever  if  we  could  live  without 
eating."  Rome  lives,  and  is  likely  to  live  forever,  whether  by  po- 
rous absorption  of  vital  aliment,  or  by  the  ^^  vis'medicairix  Naturse'^ 
which  expels  all  pecatint  humors,  it  is  unimportant  to  enquire. 

Now  I  cannot  see  the  applicability  of  the  long  passage  from  Gib- 
bon, containing  the  answer  of  the  Pope  to  Constantia.  They  tell  a 
similar  story,  and  I  believe  Protestants  credit  it,  about  Julian's  un- 
dertaking to  give  the  lie  to  the  predictions  of  the  prophets  and  of 
Christ,  regarding  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  by  rebuilding  that  struc- 
ture consigned  by  God  to  endless  destruction.  Globes  of  fire,  as  his- 
torians say,  issued  from  the  foundations,  and  so  terrified  the  work- 
men as  to  compel  them  to  desist.  I  think  it  likely  that  this  may  have 
happened,  but,  like  the  story  of  Constantia,  it  is  no  article  of  faith. 

Now  we  come  to  the  important  doctrine  of  infallibility.  It  is  a 
doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  that,  when  the  whole  world 
was  in  error,  when  every  thing  was  adored  as  God,  save  God  himself, 
and  vice  kept  pace  with  error,  the  Almighty,  pitying  this  darkness, 
sent  his  Son,  Christ  Jesus,  the  Word  made  flesh,  into  this  world  to 
■  teach  and  to  redeem  mankind.  Jesus  Christ  was  God,  equal  to  the 
Father  in  every  divine  perfection.  He  possessed  infinite  wisdom  to 
choose,  and  infinite  power  to  use  the  means  necessary  to  the  accom 
plishment  of  the  great  Task  imposed  on  him  by  his  Heavenly  Father. 
He  performed  miracles.  He  stood  over  the  grave  of  a  putrified  corse, 
and  cried,  "  Lazarus  come  forth,'.'  and  the  dead  man  arose  and  went 
home  with  his  extacied  sisters.  He  placed  his  hand  on  the  bier  m 
which  was  borne  the  only  son  of  the  widow  of  Nairn,  and  the  mourn- 
er's tears  were  dried  in  that  son's  living  embrace.     He  gave  hearing 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  169 

to  the  deaf,  he  opened  the  eyes  of  the  blind,  he  healed  the  paralytic. 
The  evidence  of  these  wonders  was  such  that  even  the  skeptical  Jew 
was  convinced,  and  all  the  people  exclaimed  that  man  had  never 
done  the  like.  • 

When  he  had  thus,  by  miracles,  proved  himself  to  be  God,  as  it  was 
no  part  of  his  divine  plan  to  remain  always  in  a  human  form,  nor  to 
visit  any  other  nation,  than  Judea,  although  all  the  nations  of  the  earth 
throughout  all  ages  were  to  have  the  gospel  preached  unto  them,  he 
chose  twelve  men,  whom  he  diligently  instructed,  as  friends,  and  not 
as  servants,  in  all  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom.  These  he  sent,  as  his 
apostles,  to  preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature.  But  before  he  sent 
them,  he  assured  them  that  he  would  abide  with  them  forever.  His 
words  were  these:  "All  power  is  given  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth. 
Going  therefore  teach  ye  all  nations ;  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  teaching  them  to 
observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you  ;  and  behold  I 
am  with  you  all  days  even  to  the  consummation  of  the  world."  Matt, 
xxviii.  9,  20.  And  that  they  might  be  infallible,  he  breathed  on 
them,  saying,  "  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  will  teach  you 
ALL  TRUTH,  and  bring  all  things  to  your  mind  whatsoever  I  have  said 
to  you."  John  xiv.  26.  "The  Spirit  of  truth,  whom  the  world  cannot 
receive  because  it  sc^th  him  not,  nor  knoweth  him;  hut  you  shall 
know  him,  because  he  shall  abide  with  you  and  be  in  you."  St.  John 
xiv.  17.  This  is  the  reason  why  the  Catholic  church  believes  in  infalli- 
bility :  If  every  man  enjoys  the  privilege  of  taking  the  bible  according 
to  his  own  understanding  thereof,  the  Catholic  should  not  be  molested 
in  the  exercise  of  a  common  right.  He  does  take  the  bible  for  his 
guide,  and  strong  as  any  in  Holy  Writ  is  the  proof  he  finds  therein, 
for  the  doctrine  of  an  infallible  authority  established  by  Christ  in  his 
church.  The  Savior  tells  the  apostles,  that  he  will  be  with  them  all 
days — and  says,  "  he  that  heareth  you  heareth  me  :  and  he  that 
despiseth  you,  despiseth  me  :  and  he  that  despiseth  me,  despiseth  him 
that  sent  me,"  &c.  In  the  name  of  God,  why  did  Jesus  Christ  say 
these  words,  and  inspire  his  disciples  to  record  them,  if  we  were 
not  to  believe  them  ?  I  cannot  conceive  how  it  is  possible  that  we 
should  take  these,  his  most  emphatic  declarations,  to  mean  any  thing, 
but  what  they  obviously  signify.  Why  did  St.  Paul  say  that  the 
church  was  the  "  pillar  and  ground  of  truth,"  if  this  pillar  and  that 
foundation  were  to  give  way  as  soon  as  tlie  apostles  died,  that  is  to  say 
in  a  few  short  yea^s  ?  Why  did  the  apostle  command  all  to  obey  their 
prelates,  if  the  wh  >le  edifice  of  truth  would  give  way  as  soon  as  ho 
had  disappeared  from  the  earth?  No,  my  friends,  of  the  kingdom  of 
Jesus  Christ  there  shall  be  no  end,  until  all  nations  shall  be  gathered 
into  the  one  fold  under  one  shepherd  :  until  we  all  meet  in  the  unitt 
OF  faith  :  and  not  as  bishop  Home  says,  jumbling  together  an  undi< 
gested  heap  of  contrarieties  and  jarring  sects  into  the  same  mass,  and 
making  the  old  chaos  the  plan  of  the  new  reformation. 

I  might  dissert  for  hours  on  this  subject,  but  I  am  compelled  to 
leave  off  here;  yet  I  beg  my  Protestant,  I  sincerely  and  from  my 
heart  say,  most  respected  fellow-citizens  to  reflect  on  these  matters, 
that  they  may  not  believe  the  misrepresentations  of  our  doctrines,  which 
they  have  too  often  heard,  as  if  we  had  no  good,  scriptural  grounds  for 
ou  faith.     Such  misrepresentation  has  done  us  much  injury.    It  has 


166  DEBATE   ON   THE 

be«n  indulged  in  so  long  that  I  do  not  wonder  at  the  horror  of  Cath-*- 
lies,  it  has,  in  many  instances,  inspired.  To  this  illiberal  feeling  raul 
titudes  of  Protestants  are  superior,  I  could  almost  say  they  are  utterly 
incapable  of  it-  they  abhor  it.  Some  of  them  are  among  the  best 
friends  I  have  in  this  city.  And  it  is  not  the  only  one  where  I  am 
proud  to  recognize  them,  and  send  them  this  humble  tribute  of  my  es- 
teem and  grateful  reminiscence. 

My  friend  said  I  had  made  concessions;  he  too  has  been  misinform- 
ed, and  knows  more  of  our  doctrine  since  the  commencement  of  this 
discussion,  than  he  ever  knew  before.  He  will  allow  me  to  say  that 
I  und'erstand  something  of  my  own  religion,  and  that  as  I  can  neither 
add  to  nor  detract  from  it,  I  exhibit  its  own  portrait,  and  not  a  carica- 
ture, and  still  less  a  flattering  likeness.  He  says,  the  Protestants  be- 
lieve in  the  apostles'  creed.  Would  to  God  they  would  even  believe 
in  one  single  article  of  that  creed!  "  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic 
church."  But  they  do  not :  or  one  other  article,  in  the  same  creed,  in 
the  true  sense  of  the  words;  "  I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ." 

Suppose  I  tell  a  man  that  I  believe  him ;  but  persuade  him  to  his 
face,  in  spite  of  his  repeated  asseverations,  that  he  did  not  say  what  he 
says  he  did.  Do  I  believe  him?  Suppose  I  say  I  love  him,  and  yet 
do  all  I  can  to  his  injury,  are  my  protestations  what  they  ought  to  be  1 
So  it  is  with  Jesus  Christ.  If  you  believe  in  him,  you  obey  his  words 
and  hear  his  church  which  he  commands  you  to  hear.  It  is  vain  to 
say,  I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  unless  we  follow  him  also,  and  keep  his 
commandments.  If  we  do  not  so,  we  are  hypocrites,  or,  at  least,  we 
deceive  ourselves;  and  if  we  despisehis  church,  he  assures  us  mosi 
positively,  that  we  despise  himself.  "  If  any  man,"  says  he,  "  will 
not  hear  the  church,  let  him  be  to  thee  as  the  heathen  and  the  publi- 
can." Matt,  xviii.  17. 

But  we  are  told  that  the  meaning  of  '*  {he  church"  is  the  whole  con- 
gregation of  the  faithful  scattered  through  the  earth.  If  so,  must  I 
traverse  the  whole  earth  and  appeal  to  every  individual  believer  for  an 
explanation  of  the  law,  or  a  defence  of  my  innocence  1  This  is 
clearly  impossible.  Whereas  Christ's  injunction  supposes  the  exist- 
ence of  a  tribunal,  which  he  commands  me  to  hear,  as  I  would  hear 
him ;  which  he  commands  me  to  hear,  under  the  penalty  of  being 
reputed  a  heathen  and  a  publican.  If  this  tribunal  could  pronounce 
falsely,  would  Christ  have  commanded  me  thus  to  hear  and  obey  it, 
as  I  should  hear  and  obey  himself?  I  hope  the  desired  answer  will 
be  given  to  this  question. 

Again,  my  friend  says  aL  Protestants  believe  the  apostles'  creed. 
•But  suppose  a  gentleman  of  the  Unitarian  denomination  should  say, 
I  believe  in  the  apostles'  creed — would  a  Protestant  of  another  denom- 
ination credit  it  ?  A  Unitarian  believes  in  Jesus  Christ,  but  how  does 
he  believe  in  him,  when  he  denies  his  divinity  ?  Here  is  the  vice  and 
error  of  the  Protestant  system.  They  all  say,  I  believe  Christ,  I  be- 
lieve the  bible ;  when  they  make  Christ  and  the  bible  teach  the  most 
contrary  doctrines ;  and  al]  think  they  are  going  to  heaven — all  ||iink 
they  believe  the  same  Savior.  Alas  !  how  manj'  souls  has  not  this 
error  lured  from  the  only  path  that  conducts  to  eternal  life !  "  There 
is  a  way  which  seemeth  to  a  man 'to  be  right,"  says  the  holy  scripture, 
"but  the  end  thereof  leads  down  to  hell."  The  sects  of  Protestants 
are  diametrically  opposed  to  each  other.     They  are  at  greater  auti- 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGIOX.  197 

podes  tlian  llie  two  Indies.  Two  men  of  different  sects  will  meet : 
Bays  one,  "  Do  you  believe  in  Christ  ]"  "  \  es."  "  But  you  do  not  be- 
lieve in  him  as  God  ]"  "No."  "No  matter,  we  are  botli  g-ood  believers." 
A^ain,  two  others — "Do  you  believe  in  Christ]""  Yesi"  "Butyoudo 
not  believe  in  a  hell  ■?"  "No."  "  No  matter,  we  are  both  sound  ortho- 
dox christians."  Oragain,"  Do  you  believe  in  Christ  1"  "Yes."  "But 
you  don't  believe  in  baptism" — and  so  it  goes. 

Now  Jesus  Christ  cannot  contradict  himself:  he  cannot  say  things 
incompatible  with  each  other,  as  that  two  and  two  make  four ;  and 
two  and  two  make  five.  My  friends,  I  come  here  not  to  attack  other 
sects.  I  come  only  to  defend  the  truth.  Of  all  religions,  all  teach- 
ing, as  they  do,  contrary  doctrines,  one  only  can  be  right.  If  one 
only  can  be  true,  all  others  must  be  untrue.  Have  you  ascertained 
which  is  that  true  onel  And  if  so,  how  have  you  ascertained  it]  To 
whatever  denomination  you  may  belong,  your  Protestant  neighbor,  as 
enlightened,  as  conscientious  and  as  pious  in  his  own  opinion  as  you 
are,  thinks  you  have  embraced  dangerous  error,  and  Jesus  Christ 
sounds  in  your  ears  the  dreadful  words,  "  He  that  believeth  not"— 
not  what  he  thinks  is  right,  but  what  is  right — "  shall  be  damned.^* 
Mark  xvi.  16. — [Time  expired.] 

Ihur  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Mr.  Cami'Bell  riges — 

I  hope  we  shall  better  understand  each  other.  The  question  be- 
tween Protestants  and  Roman  Catholics,  on  the  subject  of  infallibility 
as  respects  the  faith,  is  usually  propounded  in  the  following  form : 
'  Is  there  an  itifalltble  rule  nf  faith  .2'  Both  parties,  answer  in  the  af- 
firmative. Then,  '  Where  shall  it  be  found?''  Each  party  then  sets  about 
defining  and  wrestling  about  this  said  infallible  rule.  The  Protestant 
says,  the  bible  alone  is  his  infallible  rule ;  and  the  Romanist  says  the 
church,  or  the  bible  explained  by  the  church,  is  his  infallible  rule  ! 
Thus  the  Protestant  rests  upon  the  bible  and  the  Romanist  upon  th« 
church— neither  of  Avhich  "make  men  infallible.  We  apprehend  there 
is  a  sophism  some  where  in  the  phraseology :  for  both  parties  Jiave 
exhausted  folios  on  this  subject  and  seem  often  to  have  retired  from 
the  arena  equally  perplexed.  My  antagonist  seems  to  be  much  in 
advance  of  me,  and  sometimes  so  far  in  my  rear  as  to  be  out  of  sight. 
Meanwhile,  he  will  please  not  to  forget  that  it  is  my  province,  at  least, 
to  sketch  out  my  own  method  of  discussion,  and  lead  the  way.  My 
last  speech  is  certainly  yet  unanswered. 

I  do  not  choose  the  phraseology  which  has  been  popular  in  some 
discussions,  on  the  subject  of  the  rule  of  faith.  There  is  too  much 
ambiguity,  too  much  room  for  logomachy  in  some  of  these  definitions. 
There  is,  in  strict  propriety,  no  infallible  rule  of  faith.  Nor  is  it  pos- 
sible there  can  be :  for  men  and  angels  have  erred  under  all  rules.  1 
wish  to  be  understood.  The  terms  fallible  and  infallible  do  not  at  all 
apply  to  things:  they  only  apply  to  persons.  We  may  have  a  per- 
fect and  complete— or  a  sufficient  rule  :  but  we  cannot  have  an  infal- 
lible one.  The  fallibility,  or  the  infallibility  is  in  the  application  of 
the  rule — not  in  the  rule  itself.  The  mechanician  may  have  a  perfect 
rule ;  and  yet  err  in  measuring  any  superficies.  It  is  not  possible  in 
mechanics,  nor  in  morals,  nor  in  religion,  to  have  a  riile  which  will 
Drevent  error  •  so  long  as  those  who  use  it  are  free  and  fallible  agerta 
As  Paul  said  on  an  occasion,  not  exactly  similar,  we  may  here  say  ; 


DEBATE   ON    THE 

there  could  have  been  a  law  given  to  free  agents,  which  would 
have  precluded  error,  verily  God  would  have  given  it.  But  as  he 
has  not  given  any  such  law,  therefore,  there  has  been  error  in  heavL=!n 
as  on  enrth.  Angels  fell  and  Adam  apostatized.  I  own,  it  may  be 
said,  tbat  in  common  parlance,  we  figuratively  talk  of  an  infallible 
rule.  1  admit  that  we  do.  and  that  is  the  reason,  when  we  come  to 
debate  the  matter,  the  parties  are  confounded  :  for  the  bible  alone,  or 
the  bible  on  the  table;  and  the  church  alone,  or  the  church  and  the 
bible  together,  have  made  no  one  free  from  error.  Therefore,  there 
is  no  infallible  rule  in  truth :  hut  we  have  a  perfect  rule,  and  if  we 
apply  it  perfectly,  it  will  make  us  perfect.  So  far,  then,  as  infallibi- 
lity is  concerned,  if  there  be  truth  in  these  remarks,  both  parties  are 
again  equal.  Our  kule  is  the  bible  alone.  The  Roman  Catholic 
luie  contains  one  hundred  and  thirty  five  large  folio  volumes 
superadded  to  the  bible,  and  the  apocrypha  !  These  are  composed 
of  the  following  parts  and  parcels:  1st  Apostolical  Fathers  35  folios, 
2nd  Eight  volumes  of  Decretals,  3rd  Ten  volumes  of  Bulls  of  the 
Popes;  4th  Thirty  one  volumes  of  Canons  and  Decrees  of  Councils; 
5th  Fifty  one  folios  of  the  Ada  Sanctorum — Acts  of  the  Saints,  amount- 
ing in  all  to, — one  hundred  and  thirty  five  volumes  folio.  Our  rules, 
then,  diflfer  exceedingly  in  point  of  length,  breadth  and  thickness.  The 
Roman  Catholic  rule  is  exceedingly  unwieldy.  It  requires  a  whole 
council  to  move  it,  and  apply  it  to  a  single  opinion.  Ours  is,  at  least, 
portable. — But  still  the  phrase  rule  of  faith  is  not  Protestant.  The 
bible  is  the  faith ;  and  that  testimony  is  the  rule  and  measure  of  our 
belief:  for  in  logical  truth  testimony  is  the  only  proper  rule  of  faith. 
However,  the  question  is  not  strictly,  what  (S  the  rule  of  faith  ? 

We  both  agree  that  the  true  reason  of  infallibility  is  inspiration.  1 
was  glad  to  hear  this  noble  concession  from  my  learned  opponent. 
Jesus  Christ  was  able  to  give  a  perfect  rule.  He  therefore  inspired 
twelve  apostles  to  form  that  rule,  and  enjoined  us  to  hear  them.  So 
far,  there  is  no  diflTerence  between  us.  We  both  have  a  perfect  rule, 
and  that  perfect  rule  is  the  bible ;  and  the  reason  of  its  perfection  is 
its  inspiration.  .But  where  is  the  inspiration  of  the  one  hundred  and 
thirty  five  folios  ?  Does  it  require  this  immense  library  to  make  us 
understand  the  bible  1  However,  if  my  friend  can  establish  their  in- 
spiration, and  show  that  Jesus  Christ  has  spoken  in  these  volumes ; 
we  will  adopt  them  without  controversy.  But  there  is  a  want  of  uni- 
formity in  the  Catholic  faith  (even  with  the  help  of  these  volumes :) 
and  hence  the  four  sects  mentioned  just  before  I  sat  down,  on  the 
question,  where  shall  this  infallibility  be  found :  for  after  all  the  one 
hundred  and  thirty  five  volumes  lying  on  the  table,  are  no  better  than 
the  bible  lying  on  the  table,  the  Roman  Catholics  being  judges. — They 
must  have  an  infallible  interpreter  of  these  volumes.  Where  shall  he  be 
found  1  "  Some  say  that  infallibility  resides  in  the  head  of  the  church  : 
2nd,  Others,  that  it  resides  in  a  general  council,  in  which  the  church 
is  represented  :  although  such  a  general  council  never  sat.  3rd,  Others 
argue,  that  it  lies  neither  in  the  pope,  nor  in  the  council  separately  : 
but  in  the  two  combined — a  4th  party  says  that  it  lies  neither  in  the 
pope,  nor  in  the  council,  nor  in  both :  but  in  the  whole  church,  re- 
sponding to  any  question.  Now  might  we  not  call  these  four  parties  ? 
Do  our  controversies  about  atonement,  or  election  &c.  make  us  more 
truly  sects,  than  do  these  different  interpretations  make  parties  in  the 
Roman  church  1    But  where  shall  infallibility  be  found  \  If  this  can- 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  IGO 

uot  be  shown,  it  is  of  no  more  use  to  us  in  tiriie  of  need,  than  a 
mountain  of  gold  in  the  bottom  of  the  ocean  ;  or  a  field  of  diamonds  in 
he  moon.  I  hope  the  gentleman  will  clearly  ascertain  this  point,  and 
make  us  all  understand  where  we  shall  find  this  infallibility.  We 
would  like  to  know,  how  the  combination  of  a  given  number  of  falli- 
bles  will  make  one  infallible  being ;  or,  by  what  laws  of  neutraliza- 
tion the  fallibility  of  every  member  of  the  church  is  destroyed,  and 
the  whole  mass  becomes  infallible.  But  if  the  infallibility  of  a  dogma 
depends  on  inspiration,  what  is  the  use  of  councils,  unless  the  pro- 
mise of  infallibility  be  made  exclusively  to  councils  ? 

But  I  have  no  necessity  for  the  argument  which  I  had  framed  on 
this  point.  The  bishop  attributes  infallibility  to  inspiration — not  to 
combination :  So  do  Protestants.  Therefore  on  this  cardinal  point  we 
seem  more  likely  to  agree,  than  I  expected.  Protestants  have  then 
an  inspired  creed,  and  this  gives  to  them  all  the  infallibility,  which 
Roman  Catholics  claim  to  themselves:  but  should  any  one  say  that 
the  majority  of  a  council  constitutes  infallibitity,  then  we  should  have 
to  enquire  into  the  reasons  of  the  infallibility  of  said  majority ;  and 
for  the  sake  of  some  of  that  class,  I  would  here  state  that  these  ma- 
jorities often  are  very  lean  minorities  of  the  church.  The  council  of 
Trent  debated  eighteen  years,  during  which  time  she  held  twenty  five 
sessions.  In  one  session  there  were  but  forty  eight  bishops,  and  they 
not  the  most  learned.  A  majority  of  these  determined  that  the  apo- 
crypha was  inspired,  and  that  it  with  the  Vulgate  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament ;  was  of  paramount  authority  in  the  church.  Twenty  five 
oishops,  a  majority  of  forty  eight,  represent  the  whole  christian  com- 
munity !  The  question  now  is,  were  these  men  inspired  while  they 
Were  voting  this  dogma  1  I  wish  the  bishop  to  state  his  views  on  this 
point  clearly,  if  indeed  he  thinks  that  inspiration  is  at  all  an  attribute 
or  a  gift  promised  to  majorities  however  lean. 

But,  my  friends,  when  you  have  got  this  ponderous  creed  from  the 
decisions  of  general  comicils,  must  it  not  be  interpreted  1  Must  not 
the  dogma  of  a  majority  be  also  interpreted'?  And  who  is  to  interpret 
them  ?  Every  man  for  himself  1  Then  are  you  Protestants;  or,  Ro- 
manists working  by  the  Protestant  rules.  After  all,  I  see  nothing 
gained  by  all  this  expensive  and  ponderous  machinery.  Is  not  every 
Roman  Catholic  obliged  to  judge  for  himself  on  the  meaning  of  every 
dogma,  and  whether  he  ought  to  receive  or  reject  it?  Then,  I  ask, 
are  not  the  inspired  verses  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  as  easily 
interpreted,  as  the  inspired  decrees  of  these  councils  ]  Did  not  the  Spirit 
that  inspired  the  apostles,  teach  as  clearly,  as  the  fathers  in  their  coun- 
cils 1     I  wish  to  understand  the  bishop  more  accurately  on  these  points. 

The  gentleman  (I  regret  to  state  it)  spoke  of  Protestants  as  hating 
the  Roman  Catholics,  from  a  supposed  ignorance  of  their  creed.  For 
myself,  and  for  Protestants  generally,  I  disavow  the  idea,  and  the 
language  of  hat-red  towards  Romanists,  as  such.  We  feel  the  same 
humanity  and  benevolence  towards  Roman  Catholics,  as  men,  as  to 
Protestants.  We  always  discriminate  between  tenets  and  men,  a 
system  or  theory,  and  those  who  hold  it.  With  open  arms,  I  would 
welcome  to  our  shores  the  oppressed  of  all  nations,  Romanists  and 
Protestants.  1  would  extend  to  the  Roman  Catholic  every  facilily  to 
improve  his  condition  by  immigration  into  this  ftivored  land,  proviJeo 
only  I  were  i'ree  from  all  suspicion,  that  his  faith  in  the  pope  ali4 
P  22 


1'70  PEBATE    0:v    THE 

mother-ohnrcTi,  would  not  Induce  him  or  his  children  to  wrest  from  rrre 
or  mine,  that  freedom  and  liberty  which  I  would  gladly  parliz-ipate 
with  him.  I  oppose  hisreligioH  ;  because,  I  sincerely  think  it  enslaves 
him,  and  would  enslave  me,  if  it  had  the  power.  But,  in-  aH  this  there 
is  no  hatred  to  Roman  Catholics  as  men.  We  are  devoted  to  American 
institutions,  because  they  are  hnmane.  For  the  sake  of  Romanists,  a» 
well  as  Protestants,  we  dosire  to  see  them  permanent.  We  fear  the; 
exclusive,  proscrrptive,  and  despotic  system  of  Romanism;  but  we 
feel  nothing  but  benevolence  to  Roman  Catholics. 

My  worthy  opponent  has  done  us  great  honor  in  saying,  that  he 
knows  many  excellent  Protestants,  whom  he  esteems  highly  as  good 
7i.en.  Of  course,  then,  they  may  be  saved  ont  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
church.  If  so,  what  is  the  difference  between  his  infallible  and  our 
fellible  faith  ?  I  cannot  find  time  to  reply  to  any  remarks  of  my  oppo- 
nent, not  made  in  reference  to  my  arguments. — [Minna  b  minutes.} 

Half-past  4  o^elock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Purckll  rises — 

I  shall  reply  to  what  has  been  said,  and  then  pnrstre  my  own  line 
of  argument.  The  Catholic  church  claims  to  have  an  infallible  ruler 
jf  faith  and  an  infallible  code  of  morals.  The  former  would  be  of 
little  use  without  the  latter.  So  intimate  is  the  connection  betweere 
sound  faith  and  sound  morals,  that  we  hold  that  if  the  Catholic  codes 
of  morals  is  vicious,  she  is  not  infallible  in  doctrine.  If  the  working 
of  her  code  of  morals  is  prored  to  lead^  or  to  have  led,  into  vice,  she 
is  not  infallible.  This  never  has  been  proved,  nor  ever  can  it  be. 
But  the  contrary  to  this  has  been  proved,  and  its  proof  is  cumulative. 
.The  darkest  ages  furnish  some  of  its  brightest  inustrations.  She 
does  not  pretend  to  be  infallible  in  discipline,  in  the  sense  of  its  im- 
mutability. The  gentleman  confounds  discipline  with  morals,  and 
this  want  of  clearness  of  ideas  is  the  source  of  the  entire  difficulty. 
Discipline,  I  think,  I  have  explained.  It  regulates  the  dress  of  the 
clergy,  the  liturgical  language,  the  time  of  singing  hallelujah,  the 
mode  of  shaving  the  head,  or  making  the  tonsure,  the  giving  of  the 
cup  to  the  laity,  the  use  of  leavened,  or  unleavened  bread  for  the  sa- 
crament, selection  of  days  for  feasts  and  fasts,  &c.  &c.  The  church 
must  have  the  power  of  changing  in  these  respects — in  other  words 
of  adapting  her  discipline  to  times,  and  countries.  And  all  this,  so 
far  from  being  an  imperfection  is  a  proof  of  her  perfection,  of  her 
having  been  established  by  Jesus  Christ  to  teach,  and  guide,  and  sanc- 
tify all  nations  for  ever.  I  did  not  state  the  crude  proposition,  which 
the  gentleman  has  attributed  to  me,  viz.  that  the  pope  is  as  fallible  as 
I  am.  I  would  not  compare  myself  thus  to  him.  I  occupy  an  humble 
station  compared  to  his,  and  i  am  conscious  of  the  want  of  those  em- 
inently distinguished  qualities  of  head  and  heart  which  compose  hi* 
character.  He  has  grace  and  lights  which  I  have  not.  The  gentle- 
man tells  Protestants  a  flattering  tale,  that  they  have  is  infallible  a 
rale,  as  Catholics.  This  is  keeping  the  word  of  prointse  to  the  ear 
and  breaking  it  to  the  heart.  Does  he  not  in  the  same  speech,  ac- 
knowledge that  their  fallible  opinions,  doctrines,  traditions  make  theii 
own  rule,  the  bible,  vain  and  nothing  worth  ?  The  bible  is  a  dead  let* 
ter — all' pretend  to  find  their  conflicting  tenets  in  it.  Where  is  then, 
tl.-e  infallible  rule;     Does  he  not  charge  Protestants  as  wcW  as  Cath- 


KCMAN    CATHOLIC    EELIGION.  171 

©lies  with  error.  And  why  1  The  gentleman  said,  where  is  the  use 
of  the  head,  without  the  body  ?  I  ask  where  .is  the  use  of  a  body 
without  a  head  ■?  And  he  said,  if  the  body  regulates  the  head  it  is 
anomalous.  But  wliat  is  it  that  sends  vitality  to  the  head  1  Is  it  not 
the  heart  with  its  healthful  pulses  and  its  quickening  current  1  The 
pope  is  the  head — the  council  is  the  heart — and  I  have  no  objection 
to  his  calling  the  laity  the  members,  to  continue  the  figure.  While 
there  is  no  schism  in  the  members,  no  separation  of  the  head  or  of  the 
heart,  all  is  soundness  and  life — so  in  the  church — pope,  pastors,  and 
laity.  United  we  stand,  divided  you  fall.  The  true  theory  of  the 
church,  like  that  of  the  human  body,  is  union.  Ask  not,  does  the 
heart,  alone,  or  the  head  alone,  or  the  members  alone  contain  the  vital 
principle — they  sympathize ;  they  live  and  move  and  have  their  being 
together.  God  seems  to  address  himself  to  the  head  and  to  the  heart 
in  the  revealed  definitions  of  his  essence.  "  I  am  who  am,"  and  "  God 
IS  LOVE,"  one  of  these  definitions  is  for  the  reason,  the  other  for  the 
affections  ;•  one  for  the  Old  Testament,  the  other  for  the  New.  Both, 
however,  come  from  the  same  source  and  tend  to  define  Him — Life, 
Wisdom  and  Love. 

The  division  of  truth  into  objective  and  subjective  is  correct — but 
objective  revealed  truth  is  the  whole  truth  revealed  by  God,  wherever 
found  and  in  whatever  manner  conveyed.  What  is  the  use  of  this, 
without  subjective  truth,  or  our  own  knowledge  and  conviction  that 
we  possess  objective  truth,  and  that  we  are  sure  of  possessing  if?  Of 
this,  the  Protestant,  who  rejects  authority  in  religion,  and  pretends  to 
find  out  religion  for  himself,  from  a  book,  which  he  acknowledges,  fal- 
lible men  handed^ to  him,  can  never  be  sure.  The  fact,  the  testimony, 
the  belief  of  the  testimony,  the  feeling  consentaneous  with  the  belief, 
and  the  correspondent  action,  are  all  human  faith  and  natural  feeling, 
struggling,  and  striving  for  some  higher  and  better  gifts,  which  it  can- 
not attain  without  infallible  assurance,  without  the  Catholic  rule.  What 
is  the  testimony  that  might  be  deceived  itself  and  might  deceive  me  ? 

He  says  we  Catholics  have  a  very  broad  rule — 135  folios.  No  such 
thing.  We  have  a  quite  convenient  pocket-rule.  It  is  the  pearl  of 
great  value — a  diamond,  with  which  we  cut  the  brittle  glass  of  mere 
human  creeds  in  pieces,  and  with  which  we  solve  every  diificulty. 
It  is  this  :  "  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic  church."  They  were  the 
apostles — he  was  Christ  who  gave  it  to  us.  It  does  not  suppose  ig- 
norance, or  servile  acquiescence.  It  lifts  us  above  error,  giving  us  a 
divine  warrant  for  every  tenet  of  our  faith,  and  directing  our  under- 
standings and  hearts  to  God,  who  speaks  to  us  by  his  church.  I 
hope  I  did  not  understand  my  friend  correctly  this  morning,  but  if  I 
have  he  has  uttered  horrid  blasphemy.  I  understood  him  to  say  that 
God  could  not  have  given  a  perfect  rule  (to  make  man  infallible,  and 
prevent  him  from  error.) 

Mr.  Campbell  explained.  He  had  said  that  God  could  not  create 
a  hill  without  a  valley — could  not  make  man  a  free  agent  and  bind  him. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Could  not  God  have  created  the  angels  so  that 
they  could  not  fall  into  sin? 

Mr.  Campbell.  There  can  be  no  virtue  nor  vice,  without  liberty 
of  choice  :    neither  in  man  nor  in  angel. 

Bishop  Purcell.  My  fri«;nd  has  said  that  God  could  not  have  cre- 
ated angels  or  men  virtuous  without  making  them  free  to  sin.  The 
angels  of  heaven  are  not  free  tc  do  wrong,  are  they  not  virtuous! 


172     ^  DEBATE    ON    TUE 

Mr.  Campbell.  If  such  is  the  nature  of  angels,  they  are  virtuous 
by  nature.  Perfect  li\)erty  consists  in  acting  in  unison  with  our  na- 
ture. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Then  the  angels  are  virtuous  without  being  free. 
If  the  rebel  angels  were  virtuous  by  nature,  how  did  they  happen  to 
fall  ]  And  could  not  God  have  made  the  angels  who  are  now  good, 
by  nature,  or  by  grace,  such  from  creation  ]  I  will  now  continue  my 
argument.  It  does  not  exceed  the  power  of  God  to  make  man  infal- 
lible. Christ  was  infallible ;  for  he  was  God.  Now  if  he  could 
make  twelve  men  infallible,  as  Mr.  C.  admits  the  apostles  were,  why 
could  he  not  perpetuate  the  same  power  in  favor  of  his  entire  church, 
since  such  infallible  authority  to  teach  his  true  doctrine  is  as  necessa* 
ry  now,  as  it  was  at  anj'  former  time  1 

Now  I  have  another  strong  argument  here — it  is  old  with  us,  but 
suggested  anew  by  reading  one  of  the  Protestant  papers,  from  New 
York.  It  is  the  Palladium,  and  my  friend  seems  to  know  the  editor, 
for  he  himself  has  given  occasion  for  the  very  article  in  question.  The 
argument  is  this :  If  tradition  be  fallible,  and  it  was  not  known  foi 
300  years,  what  books  of  the  bible  were  genuine,  and  what  spu- 
rious, how  shall  we  ascertain  that  we  have  the  bible  ?  How  shall  we 
ever  know  that  the  book  is  the  book  of  God  1  The  making  of  the  ca» 
non  or  list  of  bcoks  composing  the  inspired  volume,  was  a  difficulty 
yielding  to  but  few  others  in  magnitude,  during  the  first  four  hundred 
years  of  Christianity,  when,  if  we  must  believe  my  friend,  infallibility 
had  departed,  with  the  last  of  the  apostles,  to  heaven.  How  then  can 
we  be  sure  that  our  present  canon  is  correct?  Catholics  can  be  sure 
on  this  vital  point,  for  they  have  the  voucher  of  an  infallible  guardian 
of  the  holy  deposit,  for  its  correctness;  but  Protestants,  who  have  no 
such  tribunal  to  enlighten  them,  how  can  they  be  sure  ?  Catholics 
hold  that  infallibility  was  promised  to  the  church  by  .Tesus  Christ.  Its 
testimony  is  heard  in  a  general  council,  or  in  the  pope's  decision  in 
which  all  assent.  The  church  can  subsist  without  a  general  council. 
General  councils  are  not  essential — thojgh  frequently  of  use,  because, 
though  we  all  believe  without  exception,  that  the  pope's  decision,  in 
which,  after  it  has  been  duly  made  known,  all  the  bishops  of  the  Ca- 
tholic world  acquiesce,  is  infallible,  still  the  decision  of  a  general 
council  declares  in  a  more  impressive  and  solemn,  though  not  more  au- 
thentic, manner,  the  belief  of  the  Catholic  world  on  the  contested  doc- 
trine, and  thus  more  effectually  proscribes  the  contrary  error.  The 
celebrated  Protestant,  Leibnitz,  remarked  that  there  could  be  no  cer- 
tainty of  a  correct  decision  on  religious  matters,  equal  to  that  afforded 
by  the  decision  of  a  general  council.  The  four  sects  Mr.  C.  speaks 
of  all  agree  in  the  belief  of  the  infallibility  of  the  church  representa- 
tive and  of  the  church  responsive;  if  I  must  employ  these  technical 
terms — and  as  he  asks  "  could  not  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  inspired  the 
apostles,  teach  as  clearly  as  the  Fathers  in  their  councils  ]"  I  answer, 
'  Yes,'  and  he  has  so  taught  us  to  "  hear  the  church,"  for,  no  prophc 
cy  of  scripture  is  of  any  private  interpretation. 

Let  me  now  vindicate  the  humblest  Roman  Catholic  of  my  flock,  or 
of  the  world,  from  the  charge  of  pinning  his  faith  to  the  sleeve  of  any 
man,  or  of  surrendering  his  conscience  to  the  keeping  of  his  priest. 
Catholics  do  not  believe  because  the  priest  tells  them  to  believe,  but  be- 
cause they  consider  him  to  be  the  faithful  interpreter  of  Christ  and  the 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  173 

organ  of  the  church,  hut  should  he  dissent  from  the  oracles  of  God  and 
his  ecclesiastical  superiors,  that  moment  they  would  quit  him.  They 
see  his  teaching  accords  with  that  which  they  have  heard  from  others, 
which  they  have  read,  as  the  Catholic  doctrine.  If  they  doubt,  they 
ask  other  priests,  or  the  bishop.  Tiius  while  they  know  the  priest  to 
be  orthodox,  they  hear  him,  or  rather  the  church,  they  hear  God  and 
they  believe  God.  And  in  this  there  is  no  servility.  The  faith  he 
teaches  and  the  moral  law  he  expounds,  have  both  come  from  God,  and 
to  God  they  owe  and  pay  their  vows.  My  friend  misapprehends  me. 
I  did  not  say  that  Protestants  hated  Catholics.  I  say  that  some  Pro- 
testants are  often  prejudiced  against  them,  and  I  wondered  they  are  not 
more  so.  If  he  could  prove  the  odious  proposition  so  long  before  you, 
the  Catholic  church  would  be  a  monster.  1  am  sorry  my  friend  has 
misunderstood  the  doctrines  of  the  Catholics,  and  I  am  glad  of  the  op- 
portunity which  is  thus  afforded  me,  of  coming  before  the  public  and 
showing  what  are  our  real  sentiments. 

I  come  to  the  dpctrine  of  infallibility  again.  I  will  begin  my  argu- 
ment this  evening,  and  conclude  perhaps  to-morrow  morning.  1  beg 
leave  to  read  what  I  have  myself  written  on  this  subject : 

Whoever  reflects  upon  the  countless  varieties  of  human  character, 
the  ignorance  of  some  njen,  the  prejudices  of  others,  the  passions  of 
all,  will  scarcely  require  that  we  should  expend  much  time  or  labor  to 
prove,  that  as  long  as  men  are  commanded  to  form  their  religion 
for  themselves,  even  though  the  book  they  receive  for  their  guide 
should  be  the  plainest  in  its  language  that  divine  wisdom  could  bestow, 
the  sources  of  error  will  be  never  draimed.  No  matter  how  pure  the 
doctrine  of  Uiat  book,  how  holy  its  precepts,  how  luminous  its  evi- 
dences, occasions  will  occur,  when  these  doctrines  will  be  contested, 
these  precepts  denied,  these  beaming  evidences  obscure  to  the  pride, 
the  voluptuousness,  and  the  love  of  independence,  inherent  in  a  per- 
verted nature.  Man,  under  the  influence  of  such  feelings,  will  read, 
will  write;  he  will  communicate  his  doubts  and  impart  his  prejudices 
to  others;  he  will  originate  new  dreeds,  and  form  new  sects  ;  he  will 
raise  altar  against  altar,  and  desk  against  desk;  nor  will  any  one, 
consistently  with  Protestant  principles,  have  a  right  to  ask  him  why 
he  does  so.  At  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century,  when  the  right 
of  forming  religion,  every  man  for  himself,  and  the  bible  for  us  all, 
was  first  promulgated,  the  fierce  self-constituted  apostle  sounded  a 
deafening  peal  of  defiance,  and  denounced  all  authority  in  religious 
concerns  as  spiritual  tyranny.  "  Read  the  scriptures  !"  he  vociferated 
to  the  astonished  crowd  of  wise  or  foolish,  learned  or  unlearned,  that 
thronged  to  hear  him.  "  Read  the  scriptures,  and  judge  for  yourselves  : 
your  reason  and  the  spirit  will  enable  you  to  understand  them,  as  eas- 
ily as  you  can  discern  hot  from  cold,  or  sweet  from  bitter.  Read  the 
scriptures  :  they  that  run  may  read.  Judge  for  yourselves  !"  They 
did  read,  they  did  judge  for  themselves;  and  they  decided  against 
their  apostles,  and  against  one  another ! 

"  When  hell,"  says  an  illustrious  writer,  "  prepares  some  terrible 
calamity  for  mankind,  it  flings  upon  the  earth  a  pregnant  evil,  consign- 
ing its  development  to  time."  The  time  for  the  development  of  this 
mischief  was  brief.  The  word  was  uttered,  and  it  could  not  here- 
called  :  the  principle  was  established,  which  it  was  too  late  to  rescind. 
The  disciples  of  the  new  apostles,  reading,  judging,  deciding,  became 
p2. 


174  DEBATE    ON    THE 

aposlles  the  nsclves.  They  claimed  the  right  their  teachers  exercised. 
They  claimed  it  to  change,  as  they  had  changed.  The  Lutherans, 
multitudes  of  them,  became  Calvinists ;  Calvinists,  Independents; 
Independents,  Anabaptists ;  each  sect  the  prolific  parent  of  twenty 
others,  all  differing  from  one  another,  as  much  as  each  one  differed 
from  its  parent — innovation.  Mark  now  the  inconsistftncy  to  which 
the  evil  working  of  this  scheme  reduced  the  first  claimants  of  a  right 
unheard  of  for  fifteen  centuries.  A'  Obey  !"  they  now  cry  aloud,  with 
terror,  "obey  your  superiors;  submit  to  the  pastors  whom  God  has 
appointed  to  rule  the  faithful.  It  is  their  duty  to  instruct  you,  yours 
to  follow  the  guidance  of  their  wisdom."  "  What,"  they  exclaimed, 
"  becomes  of  the  subordination  which  the  scriptuies  so  frequently  en- 
join, if  each  one  can  be  the  arbiter  of  his  own  belief]  What  becomes 
of  humility,  which  religion  so  forcibly  inculcates,  if  every  individual 

f (resumes  to  be  an  oracle  and  a  judge  1  What  would  become  of  civil 
aw  and  social  harmony  and  order,  if  the  acts  of  our  legislatures  were 
left  to  the  interpretation  of  every  interested  litigartf?  Forbear!  for- 
bear !"  Such  was  the  restraint,  as  every  one  knows,  which  Luther 
was  under  the  inevitable  necessity  of  imposing  on  the  first  followers 
of  his  revolt,  in  order  to  counteract  the  effects  of  the  disastrous  prin- 
ciple of  mental  emancipation,  so  highly  eulogized  when  it  was  first 
proclaimed,  and  received  with  so  much  enthusiasm,  until  it  was  found 
to  be  a  very  Babel  of  the  confusion  of  all  creeds — another  name,  or 
else  a  cloak,  for  deism  and  positive  infidelity.  When  we  reason  on 
principles  rightly  understood,  whose  immediate  bearings  and  remotest 
consequences  have  been  exposed  to  the  examination  of  the  reflecting 
world,  for  the  last  three  hundred  years,  these  arguments  are  as  con- 
clusive to-day,  as  they  were  when  first  urged  ;  and  when  the  right  of 
any  individual  to  believe  whatever  errors  he  honestly  conceives  to  be 
truths  revealed  in  scripture,  is  contested,  he  may  say  to  his  accusers, 
in  the  eloquent  language  of  the  Protestant  remonstrants  to  the  synod 
of  Dort  (itself  Protestant),  which  had  infringed  their  privileges  in  this 
respect:  "  Why  exact  that  our  inspiration,  or  our  judgment,  should 
yield  to  your  opinion?  The  opinion  of  any  society,  our  apostles,  the 
first  reformers,  declared  to  be  fallible;  and,  consequently,  to  exact 
submission  to  its  dictates,  they,  with  great  consistency,  defined  to  be 
tyranny.  Thus  they  decided  with  regard  to  the  church  of  Rome  ;  and 
,  you,  yourselves,  ha\e  sanctioned  their  decision.  Why,  therefore,  ex- 
ercise a  domination  over  us,  which  you  stinrmatized  as  tyranny  in  a 
church,  compared  to  whose  greatness  you  dwindle  into  insignificance. 
If  resistance  to  ihe  decisions  of  our  pastors  be  a  crime,  then  let  us 
wipe  out  the  stain  of  owr  origin,  and  run  back  together  to  the  fold  of 
Catholicity,  which  you  and  we  have  abandoned.  If  such  resistance 
be  no  crime,  why  require  of  us  a  submission  which  we  do  not  owe 
you.  Allow  us  to  differ  from  you,  as  you  do  from  the  parent  church." 
From  the  unanswerable  logic  of  this  remonstrance,  the  conclusion 
follows  irresistibly:  1.  That  every  society  formed  on  Protestant  prin- 
ciples, being  essentially  fallible,  none  should  assert  the  inconsistent 
pretension  of  controlling  faith  by  authority,  or  of  regulating  creeds, 
under  pretence  of  superior  wisdom.  2.  That  no  such  society,  and, 
therefore,  no  individual,  in  such  society,  can  be  sure  of  being  in  the 
right,  as  long  as  his  Protestant  neighbor,  with  as  many  resources  of 
iflforination,  and  as  pioufily  inclined  as  himself,  has  embraced  the  very 


EOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  175 

contrary  of  his  opinion.  3.  That  as  the  entire  system  is  based  on  the 
possibility  of  each  one's  being  mistaken,  where  the  most  learned  and 
pious  have  adopted  such  opposite  conclusions,  no  one  can  ever  make 
an  act  of  divine  faith,  which  is  incompatible  with  uncertainty,  and 
much  more  so  with  error.  4,  That,  as  long  as  such  a  principle  is  up- 
held, there  is  no  hope  of  union,  no  security  ;  consequently,  that  either 
the  whole  system  is  false,  or  some  expedient  of  union  and  unity  muet 
be  discovered,  to  induce  any  conscientious  and  rational  inquirer  after 
truth,  to  believe  that  the  Protestant  society  exemplifies  the  efficacy  of 
the  prayer  of  Christ  for  his  disciples,  the  night  before  he  suffered,  that 
"  they  may  be  made  perfect  in  one,"  We  entreat  our  readers  seriously 
to  look  into  the  different  religions  professing  to  have  been  founded  by 
Jesus  Chris*,  and  seriously  ask  themselves  the  question,  in  which  of 
all  these,  that  "perfect  oneness"  (which,  better  than  all  other  proofs, 
establishes  the  divinity  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  convinces  the  enti|» 
world  how  much  his  heavenly  Father  loved  him,  and  those  whom  he 
had  given  to  him)  may  be  found.  Let  not  this  inquiry  be  neglected, 
nor  yet  performed  lightly :  eternal  life  or  death  may  be  the  consequence 
oi  its  good  or  bad  prosecution. 

Error  in  religion,  when  it  results  from  the  neglect  of  sincere  and 
prayerful  enquiry,  is  criminal.  This  no  intelligent  Christian  will  de- 
ny.  God  is  as  essentially  the  God  of  truth,  as  he  is  the  God  of  vir- 
tue. He  can  no  more  sanction  error,  than  he  can  tolerate  vice.  His 
right  is  as  absolute  to  the  submission  of  the  understanding,  as  to  the 
obedience  of  the  will;  and  as  he,  who  violates  one  commandment 
will  not  be  saved  for  the  observEmee  of  the  rest,  so  he  that  rejects 
one  truth,  which  Almighty  God  has  revealed — not  that  we  may  ex- 
amine, contest,  adopt  or  reject — but  that  we  may  believe  it,  has  lost 
the  merit  of  saving  faith.  It  is  to  fix  the  otherwise  perpetual  varia- 
tions of  the  human  mind,  and  secure  the  anchor  of  our  faith,  not  in 
the  moving  sands  of  man's  vacillating  judgments  and  uncertain  opin- 
ions, but  by  lodging  it  deeply  and  indissolubly  in  the  rocA;  which  the 
Divine  Architect  has  made  the  foundation  of  his  church,  and  against 
which  the  winds  of  error  and  the  rain  of  dissolving  scandal  will  rage 
and  beat  in  vain,  that  the  Word  made  Flesh  vouchsafed  to  become  the 
Light  of  the  world. 

The  misfortune  of  the  great  majority  of  mankind  at  the  present 
day,  is  not  so  much  a  blind  fanatical  attachment,  (bad  as  thi?  is)  to 
the  sect  in  which  they  chanced,  to  be  born,  or  were  first  instructed, 
as  a  certain  latitude  of  principle,  which  has  obtained  the  specious 
name  of  liberality,  and  which  resolves  itself  into  a  fatal  and  unrea- 
sonable indifference  to  all  religions,  true  or  false.  The  infidel  who 
has  had  bnt  too  frequent  occasion  to  exult  at  the  success  of  a  wih' 
system  of  hostility  to  revealed  truth,  affects  to  be  unable  to  restrain 
his  delight  at  beholding  variety  pervading  the  religious,  as  well 
as  the  physical  world.  Diversity  of  creeds  is  as  pleasing  to  his  eye, 
as  the  discrepancy  of  features  in  the  human  countenance.  Incapable 
of  reasoning,  out  of  the  sphere  of  matter,  of  which  it  is  his  inverted 
ambition  to  be  a  part,  he  holds  the  different  religions  professed  by 
men  to  be  so  many  institutions,  prescribing  for  each  countrj'  a  uni- 
form manner  of  honoring  God  in  public;  all  founded  and  having  their 
pecul/  "T  reasons  in  the  climate,  the  mode  of  government,  the  genius 


ViG  DEBATE    ON    THE 

of  the  people,  or  in  some  other  local  cause,  which  renders  one  ft^mi 
of  religion  preferable,  for  them,  to  another. 

The  conclusion  to  be  drawn  from  this  doctrine,  in  as  nnuch  as  it 
levels  all  distinctions  between  irutli  and  falsehood,  good  and  evil,  is 
hvrniliating  to  reason — but  the  infidel,  for  once  consistent,  recoi's  not 
before  it :  the  following  is  his  language — "  Silicerely  profess,  piously 
practise  the  religion  of  the  country  in  which  you  live.  In  other  words, 
born  in  a  pagan  country,  adore  its  gods — sacrifice  to  Jupiter,  to  Mars, 
to  Priapus,  or  to  Apollo.  In  Egypt,  you  will  render  divine  hor.ors 
to  the  sacred  ox,  and  the  crocodile ;  in  Phenicia,  you  will  pass  your 
children  through  the  fires  of  Moloch ;  in  one  country,  you  will  im- 
molate human  victims  to  your  idol ;  in  another,  you  will  humbly  bow 
before  a  block  of  marble,  or  of  wood — ^before  an  animal,  fossil,  or  a 
plant.     Be  not  afraid  ;  God  will  not  send  one  man  to  heaven  for  hav- 

fg  been  born  in  Rome,  nor  another  to  liell  for  having  been  born  in 
onstantinople.  Therefore,  in  the  latter  place  you  will  cry.  'God  is 
God  and" Mahomet  is  his  prophet;'  and  in  the  former,  you  will  ana- 
thematise the  impostor.  A  Christian  in  Europe,  a  Mussulman  in 
Persia,  an  Idolater  in  Congo,  on  the  banks  of  the  Ganges  an  adorer 
of  Vishnou,  let  not  truth  dictate  the  choice  of  your  religion,  but 
chance — let  not  reason  decide,  but  the  measurement  of  a  degree  ot 
latitude,  or  longitude.  Your  credulous  parent  paid  divine  honors  to 
an  onion  ;  preserve  this  domestic  Avorship — a  son  can  never  do  wrong 
in  following  the  religion  of  his  father."  But  all  this,  it  will  be  said, 
is  rtnworthy  of  God  and  degrading  to  man.  Not  at  all,  he  replies, 
all  religions  are  equal — you  were  born  in  this,  to  practise  another  would 
be  presumption.  Such  is  the  reasoning  of  the  instructor  of  Emile, 
the  theology  of  Hobbes,  the  profession  of  faith  of  the  author  of  Zaire. 

"Chretienne  dans  Paris,  Mussulniane  en  ces  lieux, 
J'aiirois  avec  la  Grece  adore  les  faux  Dieux." 

Thai  the  unbeliever  should  thus  eat  promiscuously  oflhe  fruit  of 
the  tree  of  good  and  evil,  life  and  death,  should  not  create  surprise. 
His  joy  consists  in  his  being  able  to  doubt  of  the  validity  of  the  proofs 
of  religion — his  only  peace  m  life,  his  only  security  in  death  being 
made  to  depend  on  the  delusive  conviction  of  the  improbability  of  ever 
arriving  with  certainty  at  the  knowledge  of  revealed  truth — the  only 
truth,  after  all,  it  must  be  admitted,  which  it  is  necessary  for  man  to 
know — and  consequently  the  only  truth  which  God  is  bound  by  all  his 
essential  and  unchangeable  attributes  to  enable  us  to  attain. 

The  basis  of  Protestant  belief  is,  that  the  Scripture,  this  book  of  di 
vine  revelation,  is  the  only  rule  of  faith  ;  and  that  Jesus  Christ  having 
left  on  earth  no  living  infallible  authority  to  interpret  it,  every  man  is 
obliged  to  expound  it,  for  himself,  or  in  other  words,  to  seek  in  it  the 
religion,  in  which  he  is  to  live  and  by  which  he  must  be  saved.  His 
duty  is  to  believe,  what,  it  seeing  to  him,  this  book  clearly  teaches  and 
what  as  far  as  he  has  ascertained  by  subjecting  it  to  the  test  of  private 
examination,  contradicts  not  his  reason:  and  as  no  man  has  a  right  to 
say  to  ai.other,  "  my  reason  is  more  vigorous,  my  judgment  more  sound 
than  yours,"  it  follows  that  every  man  should  abstain  from  condemn- 
ing the  interpretation  of  another  and  should  consider  all  religions,  at 
least,  as  good  and  as  safe  as  his  own.  This  is  the  infidel  principle  in 
disguise.  The  Deist  takes  the  book  of  nature,  the  Protestant  take? 
the  Bible.    The  former  reads  in  Ms  book,  that  the  Supreme  Being  mus. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  177 

be  pleased  with  the  diversity  of  worship  rendered  him  by  his  creatures, 
that  no  one  "s  to  be  more  accountable  for  errors  which,  however  discord- 
ant in  themselves,  when  softened  and  mellowed  by  being  mingled  with 
the  errors  of  others,  ascend  to  the  deity  in  the  grateful  harmony  of  uni- 
versal praise.  The  latter,  with  this  only  difference  that  he  contracts 
the  range  of  the  Infidel's  misapprehension  of  religion,  and  for  the  book 
of  the  universe  takes  the  bible,  contends  for  the  same  erroneous  prin- 
ciple. 

I  need  not  shew  its  workings  to  this  enlightened  audience.    The 
are  ruiaous  in  the  extreme. — [Time  expired.] 


WEDNESDAY,  January  18th.,  Half-pott  9  o'clock,  ,8.  M. 
MR.  Campbell  rises — 

I  appear  before  you  this  morning,  fellow-citizens,  in  prosecution  of 
my  third  proposition  :  and  as  this  is  the  fifth  day  of  the  discussion, 
we  must  proceed  with  more  despatch.  We  shall  then  advance  direct- 
ly to  that  part  of  our  proposition  which  speaks  of  Roman  Catholic  uni- 
ty and  uniformity — only  intimating  to  my  hearers,  that  the  bishop's 
remarks  in  his  last  speech  upon  the  infallibility  of  tradition;  and  his 
effort  to  make  the  succession  of  the  popes  to  rest  upon  the  same  au- 
thority with  our  faith  in  the  bible,  will  be  disposed  of  under  proposi- 
tion the  6th. 

There  are  two  bonds  of  union  in  all  societies,  general  and  special, — 
the  first  connects  with  the  whole  ;  the  second  with  a  part,  one  or  more 
individuals.  We  explain  by  examples:  1st.  Take  the  Turkish  em- 
pire. It  is  united  on  the  divine  authority  of  the  Koran,  and  the  divine 
mission  of  Mahomet.  Acquiescence  in  these  is  the  general  bond  of 
union.  But  2nd.  There  are  special  bonds,  such  as  unite  the  respective 
orders  of  Mahometans,  as  the  orders  of  AH  and  Omar.  These  orders 
are  distinct:  they  are  united  by  a  special  construction  of  the  Koran. 
Belief  in  the  Koran  is  like  general  attraction  :  agreement  in  a  particu- 
lar view  of  it  is  like  attraction  of  cohesion.  So  among  christians. 
Roman  Catholics  are  united  in  one  great  generic  idea  which  char.ic- 
terizes  the  whole  sect.  That  is,  the  belief  in  a  supreme  head  of  the 
church  on  earth — a  vicar  of  Christ :  and  add  to  that,  the  exclusive 
power  and  authority  of  the  b>?hop8.  •'  Bishops  are  the  bond  of  union 
amongst  Catholics."  The  clergy,  indeed,  are  the  general  bond  of 
union  amongst  Romanists.  But  there  are  also  special  bonds  and  par- 
ties in  that  society,  of  which  we  shall  take  some  notice.  Protestants 
have  a  generdl  bond  of  union  in  a  generic  consideration,  as  distinguish- 
ing as  that  of  Mahometans  and  Roman  Catholics.  Acknt  wledging 
the  bible  alone,  as  the  only  perfect  and  sufficient  rule  of  faith  and  man- 
ners, and  the  duty  of  all  mankind  to  examine  it  for  themselves,  accord- 
ing to  their  respective  abilities  and  opportunities,  is  the  generic  charac- 
teristic of  Protestants.  It  is  one  of  the  general  ideas,  in  which  are 
united,  and  which  unites  ail  Protestants.  But  in  the  second  place  they 
are  united  in  a  most  perfect  and  unanimous  renunciation  of  that  hier- 
archical authority  which  is  the  very  essence  ol  Roman  Catholicism. 
1  athrm  that  all  Protestants  are  as  perfectly  united  in  lliese  two  grand 
principles,  as  the  Roman  Catholics  are  in  that  of  a  supreme  head  in 

12 


l^S  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Rome,  and  in  the  belief  of  tradition.  Different  saints  and  their  pecn- 
Uarities  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church  are  specific  bonds  of  union,  and 
as  much  heads  of  orders,  as  are  the  leaders  and  views  of  Protestant 
sects.  But  the  Protestants  are  as  much  united  in  acts  of  worship,  as 
Roman  Catholics.  There  are  one  or  two  Protestant  sects,  who  diffei 
in  some  important  matters,  and  areas  repugnant  to  each  other  as  are 
Jansenists  and  Jesuits  in  the  Roman  church  :  but  all  Protestant  sects 
unite  in  several  essential  acts  of  religious  worship — in  the  acknowl 
edgment  of  the  same  code  of  morals,  and  in  the  positive  institution 
of  Christianity,  such  as  the  Lord's  day,  the  Lord's  supper,  baptisn, 
prayer,  praise,  «fec.  Sects  and  differences  exist  which  ought  not :  but 
Btill  they  harmonize  a^s  much  in  their  general  and  special  bonds  of 
union,  as  do  the  Romanists  themselves.  What  are  the  Augustinians, 
Dominicans,  Franciscans,  Jansenists,  Jesuits,  &c.  but  orders  (or  sects) 
called  after  different  saints,  and  united  under  special  bonds  and  peculi- 
arities'? These  parlies  in  the  Roman  church  areas  pugnacious  as  Pro- 
testant parties :  communing  with  each  other  not  more  frequently,  nor 
more  cordially  than  do  Lutherans,  Calvinists,  Arminians,  &c.  They 
contend  warmly  against  each  other.  Their  quarrels  are  as  rank  and 
fierce  as  those  of  Protestants.  But  this  is  not  all,  my  friends.  Their 
society  is  divided  on  all  the  great  orthodox  points  of  Catholicism. 
Some  say  the  pope  of  Rome  is  supreme  in  all  things  on  earth,  tempo- 
ral and  spiritual,  that  he  is  a  perfect  representative  of  all  the  power  of 
Christ,  religious  and  political.  A  second  class  disavow  these  large 
claims — they  say  he  is  supreme  only  in  ecclesiastical  power  :  but  that 
he  is  absolute  lord  of  the  church.  A  third  class  differ  again  on  the  ex- 
tent of  that  ecclesiastical  supremacy.  Some  say  the  pope  is  above  and 
beyond  the  councils  and  clergy  ;  and  that  he  can  annul  them  at  plea- 
sure. A  fourth  party  say  he  is  subject  to  a  general  council,  and  is  on- 
ly a  general  superintendent,  a  mere  president,  or  executive  officer — 
that  the  decrees  of  councils  are  the  supreme  law,  and  that  the  pope 
merely  executes  them.  Here  are  four  distinct  sects,  on  the  generic 
idea  of  the  supreme  head.  Again  there  are  four  parties  on  the  essen 
tial  doctrine  of  infallibility.  Some  say  it  resiaes  in  the  pope  alone. 
Bellarmine  says,  (and  he  is  the  organ  of  a  principal  party,)  "  that  the 
pope  catinot  possibly  err.^^  Gelasius  says,  ''The  church  represented 
by  a  general  council  is  above  the  pope."  A  third  party  say,  that  infal 
libility  resides  in  both  the  pope  and  a  general  council  united.  A  fourth 
say,  that  all  this  does  not  constitute  infallibility,  but  that  when  the 
whole  church  shall  have  acquiesced  in  a  decree,  and  signified  it  by  a 
concurrent  response,  then,  and  not  till  then,  are  dogmas  and  decrees  in- 
fallibly correct.  The  first  of  these  parties  believes  in  the  church  vir- 
tual; the  second  in  the  church  representative  i  the  third  in  the  church 
diffusive ;- —the  fourth  in  the  church  responsive, — as  some  of  their  canon- 
ists have  taught. 

Yesterday,  in  discussing  infallibility,  I  said  it  should  be  in  the  head, 
if  any  where.  My  friend  the  bishop,  says,  it  should  be  in  the  body : 
and,  to  carry  out  the  figure,  if  infallibility  be  in  the  body,  the  head 
must  be  under  the  control  of  the  body  :  for  the  fallible  must  yield  to 
the  infallible.  Now,  the  body  is  the  animal  part  of  every  individual, 
the  seat  of  the  passions  and  affections ;  and  therefore  ought  to  be  under 
the  'ominion  of  the  intellectual  and  moral  head  :  yet  this  theory  makes 
this  body,  the  sensual  and  animal  body  govern.     No  wonder,  then, 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    EELIGION.  179 

that  the  Roman  Catholic  church  is  always  corrupt.  Bat  from  natare 
and  reason  and  revelation,  I  would  incline  to  that  party  that  places 
the  government  in  the  head.  There  are  the  powers  of  government, 
and  there  ought  to  be  the  sceptre.  It  is  abhorrent  to  reason — nay  it  is 
rather  monstrous,  to  have  the  head  under  the  dominion  of  the  body. 

But  I  hasten  to  show,  that  be  the  government  where  it  may,  in  the 
pope,  the  council,  or  the  whole  body,  it  is  always  fallible.  I  shali 
begin  with  the  head ;  and  here  we  have  pope  against  pope.  Adrian 
VI.  did,  unequivocally,  disown  the  pope's  ii^allibility.  Now,  from  this 
single  fact,  I  prove  the  fallibility  of  the  pope ;  for  Adrian  was  either 
right,  or  he  was  wrong.  If  right,  the  pope  is  fallible;  for  he  avows 
that  he  is.  If  wrong,  the  pope  is  fallible  ;  for  he  was  a  pope  and  yet 
did  err.  This  is  a  dilemma  never  to  be  annihilated  nor  disposed  of. 
Pope  Stephen  VI.  rescinded  the  decrees  of  pope  Formosus,  Pope 
John  annulled  those  of  pope  Stephen,  and  restored  those  of  pope  Ste- 
phen. Sergius  III.  so  hated  Formosus  and  all  that  he  did,  as  pope, 
that  he  obliged  all  the  priests  he  ordained  to  be  re-ordained. 

Sometimes  popes  have  at  one  time  condemned  what  themselves 
passed  at  another  time ;  for  instance,  Martin  V.  confirmed  the  decree 
of  the  council  of  Constance,  which  set  a  general  council  above  the 
pope,  and  yet  he  afterwards  published  a  decree,  forbidding  all  appeals 
from  the  pope  to  a  general  council.  He  was  certainly  fallible,  or, 
rather,  he  certainly  erred  in  one  case  or  in  the  other.  What  then  is  true 
of  one  pope  officially,  is  true  of  all  popes  officially,  and  in  proving  a 
few  regular  and  canonical  popes  to  be  fallible,  we  prove  them  all  to  be 
fallible. 

Is  the  second  opinion  better — is  a  general  council  infallible  ?  I  will 
state  a  fact  or  two:  the  council  of  Constance  says  the  church  in  old 
times  allowed  the  laity  to  partake  of  both  kinds — the  bread  and  the 
wine,  in  celebrating  the  eucharist.  The  council  of  Trent  says,  the  laity 
and  unofficiating  priests  may  commune  in  one  kind  only.  Here,  then, 
we  have  council  against  council.  In  the  time  of  pope  Gelasius  it  was 
pronounced  to  be  sacrilege  to  deny  the  cup  to  the  laity :  but  now  it  is 
uncanonical  to  allow  it.  The  fourth  council  of  Lateran,  A.  D.  1215, 
says,  with  the  concurrence  and  approbation  of  pope  Innocent  III,,  that 
the  bread  and  wine  in  the  act  of  consecration  suffer  a  physical  change. 
Then  we  begin  to  read  of  transubstantiation.  Coun.  Lat.  iv.  canon  1. 
"Did  the  church  always  maintain  this  doctrine]"  Na)',  verily,  for  a 
host  of  fathers;  nay  the  whole  church  for  the  first  four  centuries  say 
"  the  ciiange  is  only  mural,'''' — a  sanctification,  or  separation  to  a  spe- 
cial use.  Here  we  might  read  a  host  of  fathers,  if  we  thought  their 
testimony  necessary.  The  third  council  of  Lateran,  or  the  eleventh 
cecumenical  council,  has  decreed  that     ' 

"  JNTan  enim  dinenda  sunt  jnramenta  sed  polius  perjuria  qiite  contra  xitilila- 
iem  ecclcsiaslicam  et  sanctorum  patrum  veniiint  institula."  Con.  Lat.  iii.  rum 
16  Lal)l)f.  Council  Sacrosanct,  vol.  x.  p.  1517. 

Literal! J,  they  are  not  to  be  called  oaths,  but  perjuries,  which  are  taken 
against  the  interests  of  the  church  and  the  holy  fathers. 

Now  does  not  this  contradict  Numb.  xxx.  2,  Lev.  xix.  12,  Deut.  xxiii. 
23,  Zech.  viii.  17,  Psal.  xv.  4,  and  Matthew  v.  "Thou  shalt  perform 
unto  the  Lord  thine  oaths." 

Again,  the  second  council  of  Lateran,  the  tenth  oecumenical  council, 
forbade  the  marriage  of  clergy.  For  800  years  the  clergy  were  allowed 
to  marry!     For  the  first  600  years  one-half  the  canons  of  council » 


180  DEBATE    ON    THE 

T^ere  reorulating  the  clergy  as  to  tlie  affairs  of  matrimony  and  celibacy 
The  ancient  church  had  not  yet  learned  to  forbid  marriage  to  ihe  clergy 
for  with  PauJ  the  clergy  yet  believed,  that  *•  marriage  was  honorable 
in  all." 

I  have  thus  shov/n  that  the  church  of  Rome  is  notnniform  ;  and  need 
we  farther  proof  that  she  is  mutable  and  fallible; — without  that  real  unity 
and  uniformity  of  which  she  boasts  1  Have  we  not  found  pope  against 
pope,  council  against  council,  the  church  of  one  age  against  the  church 
of  another  age,  and,  by  the  acknowledgment  of  a  pope,  as  much  striia 
and  party  as  amongst  Protestants. 

Instead  of  reading  that  long  essay  yesterday,  (I  do  not  know  what 
it  was  about,  nor  who  wrote  it;  I  paid  no  regard  to  it,  it  being  obvi- 
ously read  to  fill  up  the  time) — I  say,  that  instead  of  such  readings,  I 
expected  a  reply  to  my  remarks  on  infallibility,  or  on  some  of  the  great 
matters  yet  unnoticed;  but  without  any  more  distinct  avowal  of  his 
notion  of  infallibility,  I  am  left  to  plod  my  way  as  before.  My  op- 
ponent admits  his  faith  is  not  the  bible  alone,  bnt  that  immense  jiF)rary 
of  one  himdred  and  thirty-Jive  folios,  already  mentioned.  But  as  he  is 
so  silent  on  this  point,  I  have  an  author  in  my  hand  whom  he  has  al- 
ready commended  in  this  city  as  good  Roman  Catholic  authority  ;  and, 
therefore,  I  quote  him  with  his  approbation.  He  has  these  135  folios  in 
his  eye  ;  and  on  the  question,  who  shall  interpret  for  public  use — the  Rt. 
Rev.  J.  F.  M.  Trevern,  D.  D.  bishop  of  Strasburg,  late  of  Aire,  thus 
speaks : 

"  If  each  of  us  was  obliged  to  distinguish,  among  many  articles,  those  wliich 
come  from  tradition,  and  those  which  ilo  not,  he  would  hnd  himself,  in  a  general 
way,  condemned  to  a  labor  above  his  strength.  In  fact,  that  part  of  the  preach- 
ing of  the  apostles  which  they  did  not  commit  to  writing,  svas  at  first  confided 
solely  to  the  memory  of  the  faithful,  fixed  in  particular  churches  by  the  oral  in- 
structions of  the  first  bishops,  and  afterwards  collected  partially  and  as  occasion 
fell  out,  in  the  writings  of  the  fathere,  and  in  the  acts  of  the  synods  and  councils. 
Whence  it  follows,  that  to  prove  that  such  an  article  is  truly  of  apostolic  tradi- 
tion, we  must  consult  the  belief  of  the  particular  churches,  examine  carefully  the 
acts  of  the  councils  and  the  voluminous  writings  of  the  fathws  of  the  Greek 
and  Latin  churches.  Who  does  not  see  that  this  labor  re()uires  a  space  of  time 
and  extent  of  erudition,  that  renders  it  in  general  impracticable?  There  are, 
indeed,  to  be  found,  men  of  extraordinary  capacity  and  application,  whose  taste 
and  inclination  lead  them  to  this  kind  ot  research;  with  tne  aid  of  the  rules  of 
criticisni,  all  founded  upon  good  sense,  they  balance  and  weigh  authorities,  they 
distinguish  between  what  the  fathers  taught,  as  individual  teachers,  and  what 
they  depose  as  testifiers  to  the  belief  and  practice  of  their  time,  and  they  attach 
with  discrimination  the  different  degrees  of  credibility  that  are  duf,  wiiether  to 
their  doctrine  or  their  deposition.  The  world  is  well  aware  that  such  labor 
is  calculated  but  for  a  small  number:  and  again,  after  all  how  successful  soever 
it  may  be,  it  scarcely  ever  leads  to  incontestible  conclusions.  We  therefore  are 
in  want  of  some  other  means  that  may  enable  us  altogether  with  certainty  to 
arrive  at  the  apostolic  and  divine  traditions''  The  question  is,  what  is  this 
means?  »»»*»»*»« 

Our  author  proceeds  : 

"The  same  judge,  the  same  interpreter  that  unfolds  to  us  the  sense  of  the 
divine  books,  manifest  to  us  also,  that  of  tradition.  Now,  this  judge,  this  inter- 
preter. I  must  tell  you  here  again,  is  the  teaching  bodj-  of  the  church,  the  bish- 
ops united  in  the  same  opinion,  at  feast  in  a  great  majority.  It  is  to  them  that 
in  the  person  of  the  apostles,  were  made  the  magnificent  promises:  "  Go  teach, 
lam  with  vou;  he  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me.  The  Spirit  of  truth  shall  teach 
you  all  truth,"  &c.  They  alone  then,  have  the  right  to  teach  what  is  revealed, 
to  declare  what  is  the  written  or  unwritten  word :  they  alone  also  have  always 
been  in  possession  of  the  exercise  of  it.  No  other  ecclesiastics  have  ever  pre- 
tended to  it,  whatever  have  been  their  rank,  their  dignity,  and  learning.     Ihey 


ROMAX    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  181 

may  be  consulteJ  and  heard ;  it  is  even  proper  this  should  be  done,  and  if  always 
form  the  coiiiici'  of  the  bishops,  and  their  erudition  ac- 


has  been  done;  for  they  form  the  counci'  of  the  bishops 
ouired  by  long  study,  throws  lij^ht  upon  the  discussions.  But  as  they  have  not 
tne  plentitude  of  the  priesthood,  they  are  not  members  of  the  eminent  body  tliat 
has  sucreeded  the  college  of  the  apostles,  and  with  it  received  the  promises." 
Vol.  I.  pp.  168,  169. 

So  then,  to  quote  his  words,  as  found  on  p.  108,  "  The  opiniona 
adopted  by  the  majority  of  the  bishops  are  for  all  an  infallible  rv.le  oi 
faith  !"     That  is,  "  I  believe  i'.  the  holy  Catholic  church." 

But  the  priesthood  are  sworn  "  to  interpret  the  scriptures  according 
to  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  fathers."  And  if  they  do  not,  the 
people  that  believe  them  are  innocent ! !  But  how  can  they  unlc!S3 
they  examine  all  these  fathers  1  And  what  living  man  has  read  theae 
135 folios,  with  or  without  much  care?  In  what  a  predicament  is  the 
conscience  and  faith  of  this  people !  Here  is  a  task,  which  I  oay, 
never  was,  or  can  be,  performed  by  man.  The  bishop  can  only  fulil 
his  oath  by  teaching  what  the  Catholic  church  teaches.  We  have  our 
Old  and  New  Testament  without  the  apocrypha.  They  have  the  bible, 
the  apocrypha,  and  135  folios.  Let  us  now  compare  the  Roman  and 
Protestant  rules  and  interpretations  !  Both  rules,  for  the  sake  of  argu- 
ment, be  it  observed,  need  interpretation.  But  it  so  happens,  that 
a  Protestant  bishop,  and  a  Roman  Catholic  bishop,  are  equally  fallible, 
my  opponent  being  Judge.  As  the  stream,  then,  cannot  rise  above  the 
fountain,  both  interpretations  are  fallible.     Are  we  not  .iqual  1 

Where  do  you  find  an  infallible  expositor  of  the  bible?  says  the 
Roman  Catholic.  I  answer,  Where  do  you  find  an  infallible  exposi- 
tor of  these  volumes?  You  have  a  more  difficult  task,  and  no  better 
help,  than  we.  The  Protestants  say  that  God  can  speak  as  intelligibly 
as  the  pope,  and  that  he  is  as  benevolently  disposed  as  any  priesthood. 
He  does  not  require  an  infallible  expositor;  he  is  his  own  expositor. 
His  Spirit  is  the  spirit  of  knowledge  and  eloquence,  and  can  sp^ak 
intelligibly  to  every  listener.  As  well  might  we  say,  that  he  wi.q 
made  the  eye  cannot  see,  as  that  he  who  gave  man  mind  and  speech  can- 
not address  clearly  and  intelligibly  that  mind  of  which  he  is  the  author  . 
I  ask  the  Romanist,  however,  on  his  own  principles,  where  is  his  in' 
fallible  expositor  of  these  135  volumes  ?  I  request  a  categorical  ansvsr. 

Bishop  P.  A  general  council,  or  the  pope,  with  the  acquiesjci.c.a 
of  the  church  at  large. 

Mr.  C.  How  do  we  approach — where  shall  we  find  this  council^ 
It  has  not  met  for  two  hundred  and  seventy-five  years.  How  can  they, 
therefore,  settle  a  point  between  the  bishop  and  me  ?  Every  age  has 
its  errors  and  divisions.  Every  individual  has  his  doubts.  Ought 
there  not  to  be  a  general  council  eternally  in  session  ?  If,  then,  there 
js  none — no  infallible  expositor  extant;  wherein  is  the  Romanist,  with 
all  his  proud  assumption,  superior  to  the  Protestant?  It  was  three 
hundred  and  twenty-five  years  from  Christ  before  the  first  general 
council ;  and  it  is  two  hundred  and  seventy-five  years  since  the  last 
general  council  of  Trent;  and  the  church  has  been  six  hundred  years, 
at  two  periods,  without  an  infallible  expositor !  To  show  the  equality 
of  the  two  parties,  suppose  a  Jew  were  converted  to  Christianity. 
Suppose  he  had  heard  of- just  two  sects  of  Christians;  all  the  rest 
being  annihilated,  but  the  Roman  Catholic  and  the  Protestant.  He 
has  read  the  New  Testament.  He  wishes  to  join  the  church.  He 
goes  to  the  Roman  Catholic  bishop,  and  says  :  "  I  see  two  churches, 
Q 


182  DEBATE    OX    THE 

sir:  I  don't  know  which  to  join.  I  read  that  there  is  hut  one  true 
church."  What  does  the  bishop  respond  1  "  Sir,  you  ought  to  join 
our  church."  The  Jew  asks,  "Your  reason,  sir?  lor  the  Protestant 
also  says,  I  oug-ht  to  join  his  church."  The  bishop  shows  him  Jifleen 
marks  (f  the  true  church.  He  says,  "  Read  the  Bible,  and  see  if  these 
marks  are  not  characteristic  of  us  ;  and  then  judge  for  yourself."  He 
finds  these  marks  involve  the  principal  part  of  the  New  Testament. 
He  reads,  however,  and  joins  the  church.  Has  he  not  decided  this 
question  by  examining  the  holy  scriptures  1  Has  he  not  interpreted 
for  himself?  Is  not  the  bishop  so  far  a  true  Protestant  1  or.  has  he 
only  become  Protestant  for  the  purpose  of  introducing  this  proselyte? 
There  is  no  getting  out  of  this  difficulty.  I  trust  my  good  friend  will 
not  pass  it  with  a  laugh,  and  a  bold  assertion,  as  usual.  Has  he  not 
in  this  renounced  his  own  principles,  and  turned  Protestant,  for  the 
sake  of  gaining  the  Jew  ? 

But,  when  the  Jew  has  entered  the  church,  and  the  bishop  has  told 
him  he  must  now  believe  as  the  church  believes,  for  he  cannot  under- 
stand the  Bible:  "  What!"  responds  the  Jew;  "sir,  have  I  not  deci- 
ded the  greatest  question  to  me  in  the  universe  ?  I  believed  in  Jesus, 
and  I  have  found  ike  true  church  by  exercising  my  own  judgment  on 
the  scriptures  ;  and  can  I  not  now  judge  of  minor  questions  ?"  May 
I  not  again  say,  that  the  two  systems  are  perfectly  equal  ?  The  eter- 
nal circle  of  vicious  logic — you  must  believe  the  scriptures  on  the 
authority  of  the  church,  then  the  church  on  the  authority  of  the 
scriptures :  or,  you  must  act  as  did  the  aforesaid  Jew,  on  the  advice 
of  the  bishop.  There  is  not  a  middle  course.  My  learned  antagonist 
cannot  show  you  a  middle  way.  But  I  have  not  yet  done  with  this  great 
theme.  I  wish  to  display  in  other' attitudes,  these  two  '■^  rules  of 
faith." 

And,  first,  I  shall  sketch  the  Protestant  rule.  Its  attributes  are 
seven.  1.  II  is  inspired.  2.  It  is  authoritative.  3.  It  is  intelligible. 
4.  //  is  moral,  5.  It  is  perpetual,  6.  It  is  catholic.  7.  //  is  perfect. 
We  will  now  prove  this. 

1.  It  is  inspired:  for,  '■'■  Holy  men  of  God"  says  Peter,  '•'^ spoke  aa 
they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit." 

2.  Authoritative.  "  The  word  that  /speak  to  you,  shall  judge  you 
in  the  last  day,"  says  the  Lord  from  heaven. 

3.  Intelligible.  To  the  Ephesian  converts  he  saith,  "  When  you 
read,  you  may  understand  my  knowledge  in  the  mystery  of  Christ." 

.  4.  -Moral.     "  The  word  of  the  Lord  is  pure,  rejoicing  the  heart." 

5.  Perpetual.  "The  word  of  the  Lord  endureth  for  ever;  and  this 
is  the  word  which  has  been  announced  to  you  as  glad  tidings." 

6.  Catholic.  "  He  that  is  of  God,  heareth  God's  word."  "  Preach 
the  word."     "  Preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature." 

7.  Perfect.  "From  a  child  thou  hast  known  the  holy  scriptures, 
which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise  to  salvation."  "  All  scripture  given  by 
inspiration  of  God,  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  correction,  for  instruc- 
tion in  righteousness,  thoroughly  furnished  to  every  good  work.'''' 

All  Christendom  assents  to  this.  My  opponent  admits  the  bible  to 
be  inspired.  His  rule  makes  his  church  a  sect;  for  only  a  part  be- 
lieve in  his  traditions.     All  christians  admit  our  rule  of  the  bible. 

It  is  perfect.  Such  is  the  Protestant  rule.  Now  for  the  Romanist 
rule  !     T^e  bible  being  a  part  of  the  Roman  Catholic  rule,  is  such 


ROMAW    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  183 

only  as  explained  by  the  apocrypha,  the  traditions  of  the  fathers,  the 
decrees  and  canons  of  councils,  or  in  the  hands  of  bishops ;  so  conn- 
pletcly  humanized,  as  to  lose  ail  its  peculiar  attributes,  and  is  made 
to  partake  of  all  the  characters  of  the  mediums,  through  which  it  is 
given  to  that  people ;  and,  therefore,  of  the  whole  Roman  Catholic 
rule,  the  attributes  are  just  the  opposite  of  those  seven  of  the  Pro- 
testant's. 

1.  It  is  uninspired  :  consequently,  being  human,  it  can  have  no  au- 
thority over  the  conscience  ;  and  this  makes  it 

2.  Unauthoritative.  God  alone  is  Lord  of  the  conscience,  and  no 
man  can  make  a  law  to  govern  it.  Hence  a  christian  never  can  be 
subordinate  to  any  institution  in  religion,  that  wants  the  sanction  of 
divine  authority. 

3.  Unintelligible.  No  man  can  ever  find  time  to  examine  all  the 
creed  of  Roman  Catholics.  It  is  constantly  accumulating  ;  and  if  any 
one  had  time  to  read  it  all,  he  never  could  understand  it. 

4.  Immoral.  This  is  that  attribute  which  1  wish  specially  to  con- 
sider. The  other  properties  are  all  consequences  of  those  already  no- 
ticed. But  this  demands  a  candid  and  faithful  examination..  It  gives 
me  no  pleasure  to  dwell  upon  this  theme,  to  expatiate  on  the  immoral 
character  of  the  papistic  rule  of  faith.  'Tis  here,  indeed,  we  find  the 
root  of  the  manifold  corruptions  of  that  institution  ;  and  as  I  came  here 
not  to  flatter,  but  to  oppose  error  and  defend  truth,  it  is  my  duty  con- 
scientiously and"  benevolently  to  expose  the  immoral  tendencies  cAthis 
system. 

We  have  heard  the  gentleman  say,  he  was  glad  of  an  opportunity  to 
discuss  Catholicism,  to  make  Protestants  understand  better  its  peculiar 
doctrines.  I  wish,  myself,  to  hear  his  expositions,  to  see  if  he  can 
make  it  more  acceptable.  Therefore,  I  shall  endeavor  to  tell  my  story, 
candidly  and  faithfully,  and  give  him  the  opportunity  he  desires.  This 
is  my  first  eflfort  against  Romanism.  It  was  not  of  my  selection  or 
seeking,  that  I  now  appear  before  you  :  but  as  I  am  providentially,  as 
I  regard  it,  on  this  arena,  I  shall  reveal  to  you  some  of  the  secrets  of 
that  institution,  which  seeks  to  be  rooted  in  this  Protestant  soil.  I 
siiall  attempt  this  in  the  best  spirit:  for  I  wish  to  see  my  opponent 
honorably  wipe  from  his  escutcheon  any  stain  of  the  kind,  that  I  may 
alh'ge.  On  these  points,  I  shall  be  happy  to  be  assured  that  his  sys- 
tem is  better  than  we  Protestants  can  now  regard  it. 

I  say,  then,  the  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith  is  immoral.  This,  my 
friends,  is  a  serious  and  weighty  charge,  and  deserves  to  be  clearly  and 
fully  sustained.  Before  displaying  my  proof,  I  will  only  premise, 
that  auricular  confession,  penance,  the  mass,  absolution,  and  other 
parts  of  the  system  will  pass  before  us  in  this  allegation,  sustaining 
which,  will  anticipate  some  of  our  labors  on  the  other  propositions. 

I  shall  firpt  read  from  the  Catechism  of  the  council  of  Trent  on  the 
power  of  the  priesthood  to  forgive  sin,  according  to  their  rule  of  faith. 
Auricular  confession,  is  by  this  infallible  council  declared  "  necessary 
for  the  remission  of  sins." 

"  The  voice  of  the  priest,"  says  the  council  of  Trent,  who  is  legitimately  con- 
stituted a  minister  for  the  remission  of  sins,  is  to  be  heard  as  that  of  Christ  him- 
self, who  sai  ^  to  the  lame  man,  "  Son,  be  of  good  cheer,  thy  s^iiia  are  forgiven 
thee."     Cat.  v?ouncil  of  Trent,  p.  180. 

Penance  by  the  same  council  is  thus  defined  : 

Koiui  OF  Pekanck. — ^"  Penance  is  the  channel  through  which  the  blood  of 


184  DEBAl^B    ON    THE 

Christ  flowe  into  Uie  soul,  and  washes  away  the  stains  contracted  after  baptism." 
Id.  ib.  "  The  form  of  the  absolution  or  pardon,  granted  by  the  priest,  is  this; 
'I  A!. SOLVE   THEE."      Id.  p.    181. 

The  priest  says  positively,  ^^  I  absolve  (hee."  Unlike  the  authority 
of  him,  who  anciently  declared  the  leper  clean,  he  claims  really  and 
truly  to  absolve.     The  council  declares  : 

"  Li|ili»e  tlie  authority  given  to  tiie  priests  of  the  old  law,  to  declare  the  leper 
cleaii-;ed  from  his  lepros_\ ,  tiie  power  with  which  the  priests  of  the  new  law  are 
Invested,  is  not  simply  to  declare  that  sins  are  forgiven,  but  as  the  ministers  of 
God  really  to  absolvej'rom  sin."     Id.  p.   182. 

The  priests,  then,  as  the  mitiisters  of  God,  really  absolve  from  ain 
And  more  insolent  still,  the  priest  is  said  not  only  to  represent  Christ 
but  to  discharge  the  functions  of  Jesus  Christ: 

'*  The  rites  used  in  t.Se  administration  of  this  sacrament,  also  demand  the  seri- 
ous attention  of  the  faithful.  Humbled  in  spirit  the  sincere  penitent  casts  him- 
.«elf  down  at  the  feet  of  the  priest,  to  testify,  by  this  his  humble  demeanor,  that 
he  acknowledges  the  necessity  of  ei-adicatmg  pride,  the  root  of  all  those  euor- 
luities  which  he  now  deplores.  In  the  minister  of  God,  who  sits  in  the  tribunal 
^ penance  ^&  his  legitimate  judge,  he  venerates  the;)OM:«r«w/ />£r«on  o/"o(irZ,ord 
Jesus  Christ;  for  in  the  administration  of  this,  as  in  that  of  the  other  sacraments, 
the  priest  represents  the  character,  and  discharges  the  functions  of  Jesus  Christ." 
Coun.  Trent,  p.  182. 

Again  Roman  Catholics  teach  that  penance  remits  all  sin  : 

"  '1  here  is  no  sin,  however  grievous,  no  crime,  however  erroneous,  or  howe- 
ver frequently  repeated,  which  penance  does  not  remit."     Id.  p.  183. 

This  is  the  proper  ground  on  which  to  claim  the  most  servile  obedi' 
enoirto  the  priests: 

"If  therefore,  we  read  in  the  pages  of  inspiration,  of  some  who  earnestly  im- 
plored the  mercy  of  God,  but  implored  it  in  vain,  it  is  because  they  did  not  repent 
sincerely,  and  from  their  hearts.  When  we  also  meet  in  the  sacred  scriptures, 
and  in  the  writings  of  the  fathers,  passages  which  seem  to  say  that  some  sins  are 
irremissible,  we  are  to  understand  such  passages  to  mean,  that  it  is  very  ditticult 
to  obtain  the  pardon  of  them.  A  disease  may  be  said  to  be  incurable,  when  the 
patient  loathes  the  medicine  that  would  accomplish  his  cure;  and,  in  some  sense, 
some  sins  may  be  said  to  be  irremissible,  when  the  sinner  rejects  the  grace  of 
God,  the  proper  medicine  of  salvation."  Id.  ib.  "  The  penitent  must  submit 
himself  to  thejudsrment  of  the  priest  who  is  the  vicegerent  of  God."     Ib.  p.  183. 

Therefore,  all  must  confess  once  a  year. 

"According  to  the  canon  of  the  council  of  Lateran,  which  begins:  Omnes, 
utriusque  sexus,  it  commands  all  the  faithful  to  confess  their  sins  at  least  once  s 
year."     Id.  p.  193. 

But  this  immoral  law  presumes  farther  yet.  It  changes  the  laws  of 
God,  and  divides  sins  into  venial  and  mortal,  and  fixes  the  price.  As 
every  thing  depends  upon  the  authority  of  these  allegata  I  have  hitherto 
quoted  from  the  catechism  of  the  council  of  Trent,*  I  now  introduce 
one  of  the  most  popular  of  the  saints  of  the  modern  church.  This 
saint  Ligori  was  sainted  by  saint  Pius  VII.  that  best  of  modern  popes, 
who  restored  the  order  of  the  Jesuits,  and  the  "  Holy  Inquisition." 
Saint  Ligori  writes  the  moral  theology  of  the  church  of  Rome  in  some 
eight  or  nine  volumes  :  and  so  orthodox,  that  his  works  are  owned  al- 
most by  every  priest.  I  quote  from  a  synopsis  of  that  system  of  which 
we  shall  hereafter  speak  more  particularly.  We  shall  hereafter  heat 
the  saint  in  his  definitions  of  sins. 

"  This  is  a  mortal  sin,"  says  Ligori,  "  which,  on  account  of  its  enormity,  de- 
stroys the  grace  and  friendship  of  God,  and  deserves  eternal  punishment.  It  is 
called  mortal,  because  it  destroys  the  principle  of  spiritual  life,  which  is  habitual 
grace,  and  kills  the  soul. 

♦  See  Catechism,  council  of  Trent,  as  revised  by  John  Hughes  of  Pl'Uadelphia.  iirieat  of 
Rt.  John's  church,  pp.  Ib3,  193. 


HOMAW    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  185 

V*»ial  «in  is  that  which,  on  account  of  its  levity,  does  not  destro/  the  grace 
and  friendship  of  God  although  it  diminishes  the  (ervor  of  charity,  and  deserves 
a  temporal  punishment.  It  is  called  venial,  because  the  principle'  of  the  spiritual 
life,.g'race,  beinr  still  sound,  it  attfrcts  the  soul  with  languor,  that  is  easily  cured, 
the  pardon  of  n-liicli  is  easily  obtained."    Ligor.  lib.  v.  n.  51.  [Synopsis,  p.  20. 

The  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith  erects  a  tribunal  of  confession  un- 
known in  scripture,  and  commands  all  to  come  to  it  at  least  once  a 
year.  It  moreover  institutes  a  new  office  called  confessor,  unknown 
in  the  New  Testament,  and  gives  to  him  the  office  of  a  father,  a  phy- 
sician, a  teacher,  and  a  judge. 

"  Tlie  oliicts  that  a  good  confessor  is  bound  to  exercise."  "  are  four:  namely, 
those  of  Father,  Physician,  Teacher,  and  Judge."     Ligor.  Theol.  T.  viii.  p.  7. 

The  confessor  forgives  all  sine  on  confession,  even  the  sin  against 
the  Holy  Spirit: 

"There  is  no  sin,  however  grievous,  no  crime  however  enormous,  or  however 
frequently  repeated,  which  penance  does  not  remit."  Cat.  Conn.  Trent,  p.  183. 

Penance  here  means  the  "  Tribunal  of  confession :"  for  this  tri- 
bunal is  sohietimes  called  simply  ^^  confession  "  "  The  sacrament  of 
confession  :"  at  other  times  it  is  called  the  "  tribunal  of  penance." 
Sometimes  simply  "  Penance,"  and  he  who  confesses  is  called  "  the 
penitent."  But  satisfactions  and  penances  are  to  be  apportioned  ac- 
cording to  the  discretion  of  the  priest. 

"According  to  the  council  of  Trent,  (Sess.  xiv.  c.  8.)  the  satisfactions"  (by 
which  they  mean  penances,)  "  ought  to  be  in  proportion  to  the  crime,  since  those 
confessors  tcAo  enjoinlight  penanct*  for  grievous  sins,  participate  of  those  sins; 
nevertheless  the  confessor,  for  just  reasons,  can  diminish  the  penances,  provided 
the  penitent  is  afl'ected  with  violent  compunction,  or  if  it  be  during  the  tfme  of 
i  jubilee,  or  a  plenary  indulgence,  and  especially,  if  he  labor  under  any  infirmi 
ty  of  body  or  mind.  And  lastly,  (to  be  brief,)  always  whenever  a  prudent  fear 
IS  entertained,  lest  the  penitent  would  not  perform  penance  due  to  his  sins. 
Such  is  the  comii>on  doctrine  taught  by  the  doctors,  with  St.  Thomas."  Ligor. 
Prax.  Con.  N.  ii. 

But  still  worse:  this  immoral  law  or  rule  of  faith  repeals  and  annuls 
certain  positive  divine  laws.  I  have  here  two  catechisms,  published 
Dy  the  authority  of  the  church.  They  have  both  expunged  wholly  the 
second  commandment ;  so  that  it  should  not  stand  in  the  way  of  pay- 
ing reverence  to  images.     [Time  expired.] 

Half  past  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

If  my  friend,  Mr.  Campbell,  has  failed  to  establish  against  the 
Catholic  church,  a  single  one  of  those  propositions,  which  have  been 
so  conspicuously  before  the  public  for  the  last  two  or  three  months, 
and  if  I  have  established  two  or  three  of  them  against'his  own  vague 
theory,  it  is  not  for  want  of  splendid  abilities  on  his  part,  or  the  pos- 
session of  them  on  mine.  The  reason  of  his  failure,  is  the  inherent 
weakness  of  the  cause  he  advocates,  as  the  true  secret  of  my  success, 
is  to  be  found  in  the  impenetrable,  diamond  strength,  and  beauty  of  the 
institution,  which,  in  an  evil  hour  for  his  ■past  glory  as  a  controversial- 
ist, he  volunteered  to  attack.  He  has  this  day  (and  again  I  thank  him) 
brought  up,  for  discussion,  the  most  important  subject  that  can  occupy 
or  engross  ihe  attention  of  this  enlightened  audience,  viz.  the  rule  of 
faith.  If  fairly  published,  as  I  have  every  reason  to  believe  this  con- 
troversy will  be,  it  will  send  forth  sound  and  useful  information, 
through  the  whole  length  and  breadth  of  the  land,  upon  a  topic  of  the 
most  vital  interest;  and  I  will,  most  joyfully,  meet  Mr.  C.  on  that 
(j2  24 


186  DEBATE    ON    THE 

question,  for  I  hail  with  exultation  such  an  opportunity  of  dispelling 
prejudice  and  misunderstanding  with  regard  to  our  real  principles.  / 
will  give  categorical  answers  to  all  the  questions  he  has  propounded ; 
and,  therefore,  do  I  take  up  the  subject  he  has  been  pleased  to  touch. 
1.  He  says,  the  methods  of  electing  the  pope  are  various.  But  lei 
that  pass :  the  method  is  nothing.  It  is  with  his  authority  we  are  con- 
cerned. He  has  wasted  much  time  in  building  up  a  house  of  sand,  to 
show  how  easily  he  could  demolish  it,  by  showing  that  the  pope  ia 
not  infallible ;  whereas,  I  have  repeatedly  told  him,  that  the  Catholic 
church  has  never  taught  that  the  pope's  infallibility  was  an  article  of 
faith.  He  spoke  of  some  more  or  less  important  but  unessential  points  of 
difference  of  opinion  between  Dominicans  and  Jesuits.  But  he  should 
have  shown,  to  establish  the  proposition  before  this  house,  that  these  or- 
ders disagree  with  regard  to  articles  of  faith.  Their  minor  differences  are 
nothing,  so  long  as  they  implicitly  believe  every  article  of  faith  revealed 
by  almighty  God  and  proposed  for  their  belief  by  the  church,  which  they 
all  hear,  and  which  they  regard  as  the  "pillar  and  ground  of  the 
truth."  This  is  the  solid  and  immovable  foundation  of  their  union. 
The  case  of  the  cup  given  to,  or  withheld  from,  the  laity,  as  I  have 
already  told  him,  is  one  merely  of  discipline.  It  may  now  be  given, 
or  not,  as  the  pope  may  see  cause.  In  the  time  of  Gelasius,  it  was 
pronounced  sacrilege  to  deny  the  cup  to  the  laity ;  and,  if  all  my 
hearers  had  read  church  history,  I  need  not  tell  them,  it  was  because 
of  the  leaven  of  Manicheism  still  working  in  pretended  communi- 
cants, who  forbade  the  use  of  wine  as  coming  from  the  evil  principle.  No 
father  of  the  church,  however,  said,  that  the  consecration  of  the  eucharis- 
tic  species,  is  a  mere  '  separation,'  or  the  change  only  a  '  moral  change.' 
I  defy  him  to  the  proof.  Mr.  C.  says  :  "  So  far  Protestants  and  Cath- 
olics are  equal ;"  for,  that  they  have  also  a  grand  generic  principle, 
viz  :  that  the  Bible  is  their  rule  of  faith,  and  the  Bible  alone.  Now, 
I  take  up  the  organ  of  a  numerous  body  of  christians,  the  Christian 
Palladium,  and  I  meet  him  here  with  a  strong  argument  in  my  favor, 
upon  this  principle.  Speaking  of  Mr.  Campbell,  (I  mean  by  this  no  per- 
sonality, that  can  be  thought  invidious  :  I  intend  none)  the  editor  ob- 
serves :  "  He  frequently  speaks  of  '  the  Bible  alone  ,•'  but  this  is  not  a 
term  used  generally  by  the  brethren  in  New  England,  and  is  taught 
by  few  except  Mr.  C.  We  never  knew  our  brethren  to  boast  of  walk- 
ing by  the  Bible  alone.  This  we  regard  as  an  error,  let  who  w^ill 
PROCLAIM  IT.  We  say,  give  us  the  Bible,  but  not  alone.  Let  us  have 
A  God,  a  Christ,  a  Spirit,  and  a  ministry  accompanying  it.  There 
was  a  law  given  to  the  Jews,  and  also  a  testimony,  which  they  were 
bound  to  observe.  The  testimony  of  the  inspired  prophets  did  not  con- 
tradict the  law,  but  taught  and  enforced  the  same  truths.  The  ancients 
were  to  walk  by  the  law  and  the  testimony,  which  was  called  a  word. 
(Is.  viii.  20.)  What  this  "  redoubtable  captain"  of  reform  says,  of 
sailing  sometimes  under  this  flag  and  sometimes  under  that,  is  per- 
fectly applicable  to — "  but  I  will  not  read  further:  this  is  sufficient 
for  my  argument.  The  Bible  alone  is  not  the  rule  of  faith  to  all  Pro- 
testants. Quakers,  Mormons,  &c.,  think  not  so,  as  I  have  already 
proved.  And,  now,  Mr.  Campbell  can  do  infinitely  more  with  the  in- 
tellects of  his  hearers,  than  the  pope  has  ever  done  with  those  of  Cath- 
olics, if  he  can  persuade  them  that  the  differences  between  Protestants, 
who  all  take  the  Bible  for  their  rule  of  faith,  are  unimportant.     Is  the 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  187 

divinity  of  Christ  an  important  or  an  unimportant  article  ?  One  class 
of  Bible-reading  Protestants  admit  the  doctrine ;  another  reject  it  with 
horror:  pretty  unity  this!  The  Episcopalians  believe  in  the  necessity 
«)f  submission  to  the  bishops ;  and  eloquently  have  I  heard  the  author- 
ity of  the  church  advocated  by  them.  They  do  not  say  that  the  church 
is  infallible,  and  in  this  they  are  inconsistent.  But  will  they  allow  that 
tlie  difference  between  them  and  Presbyterians  is  unimportant  ?  Is  the 
doctrine  of  a  hell,  with  endless  torments  there  for  the  wicked,  unim- 
portant'? One  class  of  Bible-readers  hold  this  also,  and  another  class 
leject  it !  Alas  !  for  the  declaration  of  my  friend,  that  he  can  prove 
whatever  he  states  to  be  a  fact.  I  strongly  suspect  a  man  who  makes 
such  asseverations. 

He  is  loud  in  his  panegyrics  on  the  unity  of  Protestants  in  essential 
acts  of  worship :  they  pray  together,  &c.  If  this  were  even  so,  of 
what  avail  is  it,  when  they  differ  in  essential  doctrines.  But,  is  not  my 
friend  aware,  that  this  is  by  no  means  a  facti  And  what  reliance  can 
we  place  on  his  statements  of  what  occurred  centuries  ago,  when  here, 
at  home,  and  refutation  nigh  at  hand,  he  makes  such  curious  assertions  ? 

Did  not  a  case  occur,  last  summer,  within  sixty  miles  of  Cincinnati, 
at  Dayton,  when  the  Episcopalian  minister,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Allen,  for- 
bade the  Rev.  Mr.  Peabody,  a  Unitarian  clergj'man,  of  irreproachable 
morals  and  great  amiableness  of  disposition,  to  preach  in  his  church  ] 
Did  not  the  bishop  reprimand  the  vestry,  and  Episcopalian  minister, 
for  having  previously  allowed  him  to  preach  there  1  I  think  the 
Episcopalian  bishop  acted,  in  this  respect,  as  he  should  have  done.  I 
blame  none  of  the  parties  concerned,  but  I  state  an  incontrovertible 
fact.  Again,  at  Pottsville,  Pennsylvania,  another  case  occurred.  A 
Unitarian  minister  died  there,  and  the  Episcopal  clergyman  refused  to 
say  prayers  at  his  funeral,  because  of  his  religious  belief.  What, 
then,  becomes  of  my  friend's  vague  and  general  assertion,  about  unity 
among  Protestants  in  essential  acts  of  worship  1  Will  he,  then,  ex- 
communicate the  Unitarian  1  and,  if  he  once  begin,  how  many  more 
sects  must  be  put  out  of  the  pale  ? 

Let  him  shew  me  that  a  Jesuit  or  a  Dominican,  a  Franciscan,  or  a 
Benedictine,  or  an  Augustinian  ever  refused  to  let  a  member  of  either 
of  these  orders  preach  in  his  church,  or  to  say  prayers  over  a  corpse 
because  of  the  difference  of  orders'?  Such  a  thing  has  never  been  heard 
of;  so  that  we  have  unity,  and  Protestants  have  none,  neither  in  doc- 
trine, nor  in  worship;  neither  in  essentials  nor  in  non-essentials,  them- 
selves being  judges. 

If  my  hearers  wish  for  a  practical  and  convincing  proof  of  Catholic 
uniformity  of  faith,  they  have  only  to  enquire  of  the  emigrants  from 
the  various  countries  of  Europe,  who  have  fled  from  the  oppression  of 
their  rulers  at  home,  to  find  free  and  happy  homes  amongst  us  here, 
and  I  promise  them  that  however  awkward  their  appearance,  however 
broken  their  language,  or  uncouth  their  apparel,  they  will  all  answer 
the  same  on  doctrinal  points.  America,  Asia,  Europe,  Africa,  New 
Holland,  our  faith  is  every  where  the  same,  like  our  God  and  our 
church.  Who  can  make  void  the  prayer  of  Christ  for  unity  ■?  W'ho 
can  disturb  the  church's  union  ?  As  well  might  he  pretend  to  make 
the  harmony  of  heaven  to  sleep.  Is  this  union  exemplified  among 
Protestants?  The  very  contrary  is  true.  And  why?  Because  the 
apple  of  discord  is  flung  among  them.  The  seeds  of  disorganization  and 


188  DEBATE    ON    THE 

death  wars  thickly  sown  in  Protestantism  from  the  birth.  Sects  multiply 
without  end — their  name  is  Legion.  My  friend  was  quite  witty,  about 
the  135  ponderous  folios  which,  according  to  him,  a  Catholic  must 
read  to  understand  the  doctrines  of  his  church.  But  does  he  not  per- 
ceive that  a  Protestant  is  infyiitely  worse  off?  For  he  must  read  lan- 
guages in  which  the  fathers  of  the  church  have  not  written — Hebrew, 
Syriac,  Arabic;  as  well  as  those  in  which  the  fathers  did  write,  Greek, 
Latin,  &c.  before  he  can  form  a  prudent  judgment  that  he  has  acquire^ 
the  elementary  knowledge  necessary  to  understand  his  rule  cf  faith. 
He  must  read  folios  of  commentators  and  learned  dissertations  on 
controverted  texts.  He  must  decide  for  himself  what  books  of  scrip- 
ture are  genuine  and  what  apocryphal,  or  spurious.  For  this  purpose 
he  must  explore  the  archives  of  the  ancient  churches,  all  the  dusty 
tomes  and  ponderous  folios  of  the  ecclesiastical  writers,  to  ascertain 
what  books  were  regarded  in  their  times  as  canonical,  and  what  as  un- 
canonical.  And  when  he  has,  if  ever,  accomplis-hed  this  herculean 
task,  he  will  be  no  better  off  than  when  he  began,  for  he  can  never  re- 
ly on  the  testimony  of  those  fathers,  whom  he  considers  just  as  liable 
to  have  been  mistaken  as  himself!  Thus  he  can  never  be  sure  that  he 
possesses  objective  truth,  or  the  revealed  will  of  God :  he  can  never 
be  sure  that  he  possesses  subjective  truth,  that  is,  that  he  has  a  perfect 
knowledge  of  what  that  will  is.  Thus  he  can  never  be  sure  that  his 
rule  of  faith  is  inspired,  authoritative,  perfect.  /  call  on  my  learnea 
friend  to  prove  the  contrary  of  this  argument,  if  he  can,  And  if  he  can- 
not, I  have  clearly  established  the  contrary  of  Lis  proposition,  viz  : 
that  Protestants  are  not  uniform  in  their  faith,  neither  can  they  be.  Now 
mark  the  difference  on  the  Catholic  side  of  the  argument.  We  go  for 
the  Bible  and  tradition — the  whole  word  of  God,  written  and  unwrit- 
ten. We  take  the  Bible  and  the  church;  the  Bible  and  the  testimony. 
This  renders  for  us  assurance  doubjj'  sure.  We  believe  that  Christ 
established  a  church  on  earth  which  he  made  the  guardian  of  the  divine 
deposite.  From  that  church,  that  divinely  appointed  guardian  we  receive 
the  heavenly  gift.  She  vouches  for  its  accuracy,  and  on  her  testimony 
we  receive  the  Bible,  as  an  inspired,  authoritative,  perpetual.  Catholic, 
perfect,  and,  explained  by  her,  intelligible  volume.  But  as  we  know 
on  the  authority  of  St.  John  xviii.  21, 25,  that  the  world  itself  could  not, 
as  he  thought,  contain  all  that  Christ  spoke,  and  he  always  spoke 
to  instruct  or  edify — as  we  know  that  Peter  "  with  many  other  words" 
not  recorded  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  convinced  the  Jews  that 
Jesu8  was  the  Messiah — as  w^e  know  moreover  that  St.  Paul  com- 
manded the  Thessalonians,  2d.  Ep.,  2d.  ch.,  14.  v.  to  hold  the  tra- 
ditions which  they  had  learned,  tt'Ae/Aer  by  the  word,  or  his  epistle; 
and  ordered  Timothy  to  hold  the  form  of  sound  words  which  he  had 
heard  from  him,  in  faith;  we  therefore  place  the  word  of  God,  so  cori- 
veyed  to  us,  by  the  side  of  Scripture,  and  in  this,  as  I  have  just  shewn, 
the  Scripture  itself  is  our  guide.  Our  traditions  do  not,  like  those  :f 
the  Pharisees  whom  Christ  reproached,  make  the  Scripture  void.  W* 
believe  nothing  contrary  to  the  Bible — nothing  that  the  Bible  does  not 
clearly  approve.  The  same  God  that  revealed  the  Bible,  established 
the  church.  They  do  not  contradict,  they  mutually  sustain  each  other. 
I  did  not  say  that  the  pope  is  inspired,  that  the  council  is  inspired,  or 
that  the  church  is  inspired;  but  I  do  say  that  the  church,  whether  as- 
iiembled  in  a  general  council,  or  diffused  throughout  the  world,  is  as 


HOMAN   CATHOLIC    KKLIGION.  189 

certainly  assisted  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  teach  all  truth,  as  the  evan- 
gelists and  other  writers  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  were  inspired  by  the 
same  divine  Spirit  to  write  the  special  truths  which  tliey  were  commia' 
sioned  to  reveal  to  particular  churches,  and  on  particular  occasions.  A 
Catholic  is  under  no  necessity  of  knowing  every  thing  that  has  been 
ever  said  or  done  by  the  doctors  and  fathers  of  the  church,  before  he 
can  understand  what  are  the  articles  of  his  faith.  He  knows  that,  in 
regard  to  doctrine  they  unanimously  agree  in  receiving  the  Apostles' 
creed.  Hence  he  is  sure  that,  "  I  believe  in  God,  the  Father  Almighty, 
Creator  of  Heaven  and  Earth"  is  an  article  of  faith  which  none  of  these 
fathers  contradict,  and  he  has  the  same  absolute  certainty  with  regard 
to  all  the  remaining  articles,  viz :  I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  in  the 
Holy  Ghost,  the  holy  Catholic  church,  the  communion  of  saints,  the 
forgiveness  of  sins.  So  far  for  the  doctrine ;  besides  which  articles 
he  is  in  the  habitual  state  of  mind  to  believe  implicitly  whatever  God 
has  revealed  and  proposed  by  his  church.  Then  for  the  natural  and 
moral  law  he  has  an  equally  comprehensive  epitome,  viz  :  the  Ten 
commandments  of  God  ;  with  respect  to  which  he  knows  that  there 
has  never  been  the  slightest  difference  of  opinion. 

Neither  the  pope,  nor  a  general  council,  nor  the  whole  church  has 
now,  or  ever  had,  the  power  to  change,  or  suppress  an  article  of  the 
creed,  or  a  precept  of  the  decalogue.  Is  there  any  thing  vague  in 
this?  any  thing  indistinct]  anything  unscriptural  or  antiscriptural? 

My  friend  does  not  hear,  or  correctly  state  what  I  say.  I  did  not 
say  that  the  body  ruled  the  head.  It  would  be  a  contradiction  in  terms  ; 
because  the  body  supposes  a  head  and  a  heart,  which  every  body 
ought  to  have.  There  must  be  no  schism  in  the  body.  He  has  made 
some  very  eloquent  observations  on  the  impossibility  of  determining 
where  the  infallibility  resides,  whether  in  the  head  or  in  the  body  or 
both  &c.  in  the  pope,  or  in  a  general  council,  and  argues  that  we  may 
therefore  as  well  have  none  at  all.  Now,  let  me  illustrate  this  point. 
Has  not  my  friend  a  mind  and  one  too  highly  endowed  by  nature  ? 
Well,  does  he  know  where  it  resides?  Is  it  in  his  head;  or  in  his 
heart,  or  in  his  stomach  ?  (a  laugh)  Does  he  know  where  to  put  his 
hand  upon  it  ]  There  are  various  theories  upon  this  subject  among 
scientific  men.  But  who  denies  that  he  has  a  mind  ]  I  repeat,  who 
denies  the  existence  of  mind  ?  Does  it  affect  this  belief  to  say  that 
we  cannot  tell  whether  it  is  here  or  there — in  the  body  or  around  it  ?  So 
it  is  with  the  heavenly  mind  that  guides  the  church.  Even  if  we  did 
not  know  its  exact  place  of  residence,  we  could  easily  judge  of  its 
influence  and  guidance  by  its  effects.  But  we  do  know  where  it  evin- 
ces its  presence,  as  I  have  more  than  once  explained  to  the  gentleman. 

What  has  Adrian's  opinion  to  do  with  the  question  1  It  was  but  his 
personal,  private  opinion,  and  no  article  of  faith.  Whether  this  opi- 
nion was  right,  or  wrong,  all  I  said  stands  good.  The  witty  conceit 
of  my  friend  was  a  sophistry  suggested  by  the  pagan  oracles,  who 
could  respond  in  such  ambiguous  terms,  that  it  might  be  interpreted 
in  favor  of  the  oracle's  foreknowledge  according  to  the  event ;  for 
instance  a  king  going  out  to  battle  would  be  told,  "  You  will  destroy  a 
great  city;"  but  whetherit  was  his  own,  or  his  enemies',  depended  on 
the  issue.     The  idea  is  borrowed  from  Pagan  craft.  '  "<? 

[I  am  now  admonished  to  dilate  a  little  longer  on  the  decision  of 
the  council  of  Constance  with  regard  to  the  '  Cup.'  1  have  frequently, 


190  Di'-BATE    ON    THE 

in  my  intercourse  with  persons  not  Catholic,  heard  this  difficulty  pro- 
posed ;  and  I  am  glad  of  the  opportunity,  once  for  all,  of  explaining 
It.  Why  does  the  Roman  Catholic  church  withhold  the  cup  from 
the  laity  1  In  the  early  ages,  the  holy  eucharist  was  communicated  to 
the  faithful  under  either  species ;  often  under  both.  When  the  eucha- 
rist was  carried,  as  it  was  the  practice  of  primitive  christians  to  carry 
it  with  them  in  all  their  sojournings,  by  sea  and  land,  as  wine  was  ex- 
posed to  sour  in  tropical  climes,  they  consequently  carried,  on  their 
travels,  only  the  species  of  Bread.  Did  they  believe  that  the  virtue 
of  the  eucharist  was  thus  destroyed  1  No.  They  knew  with  St.  Paul 
that  .Tesus  (Christ,  rising  from  the  dead,  dieth  no  more.  Death  shall 
no  longer  have  dominion  over  him.  They  knew  therefore  that  his 
flesh  was  living  flesh,  not  dead  and  bloodless  ;  and  that,  consequent- 
ly, in  the  eucharist,  under  either  species  the  flesh  and  blood  are  in- 
separably united. 

What  was  the  reason  of  the  abolition  of  the  practice  ?  When  the 
deacons  distributed  the  consecrated  elements  to  the  faithful,  there 
were  many  infirm,  decrepit,  and  palsied  communicants,  from  whose 
trembling  hands,  or  lips,  it  was  feared,  as  it  had  frequently  occurred, 
the  cup  might  fall,  and  thus  might  the  holy  elements  be  trodden  under 
foot  and  profaned.  A  contrarj'  usage  was  therefore  instituted,  and  it 
has  since  prevailed.  The  dislike,  indeed  disgust,  which  many  persons 
feel  for  wine,  the  unwillingness  to  drink  from  a  chalice  which  had 

Eassed  from  mouth  to  mouth,  &c.  &c.  are  causes  which,  in  all  pro- 
ability,  prevent  a  change  in  the  present  disciplinary  regulation,  but 
the  church  could  to  morrow  reestablish  the  abolished  practice  of  giv- 
ing the  cup  to  the  laity,  if  she  please.  She  did  so,  since  the  Pro- 
testant reformation,  in  favor  of  the  Bohemians. 

The  subject  of  oaths  and  perjuries  was  quoted.  Any  man  in  his 
sober  senses  must  discern  that  my  friend  has  mistaken  the  meaning 
of  the  pope.  Examine  the  circumstances.  He  supposes  the  truth 
that  the  church  neither  can  nor  does  require  any  thing  contrary  to 
justice  and  judgment,  and  truth,  which,  in  all  her  standards,  and  in  all 
her  catechisms,  she  teaches  as  the  essential  conditions,  for  every  lavf- 
ful  oath.  Again,  she  every  where  teaches,  with  St.  Paul,  that  an  oath, 
contrary  to  conscience,  is  a  sin. 

The  pope  knew  that  the  church  could  not — that  God  himself,  who 
founded  her  as  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth,  could  not  be  pleas- 
ed with  sin,  or  served  by  a  lie.  Let  me  illustrate  this  matter  and 
set  it  at  rest  for  ever.  An  infidel,  swears  that  he  will  write  against 
the  utility  of  the  bible,  deny  its  authenticity,  undermine  its  evidences, 
cast  it  into  the  flames.  Is  his  oath  an  act  of  religion  ]  Is  it  not  rather 
a  perjury  1  Again — a  man  swears  to  take  away  the  life  of  another 
man,  justly  or  unjustly,  he  boots  not.  Is  not  his  oath  a  perjury, 
rather  than  an  oath,  since  it  is  manifestly  against  the  utility  of  socie- 
ty and,  consequently,  against  the  order  of  God  ?  It  is  remarkable  T:.di 
the  pope  spsaks  too  of  an  oath  against  the  teaching  af  the  fathers, 
♦' can/ra  instituta  patrum,"  than  whose  sermons  against  all  grievous 
crimes,  and  in  an  especial  manner,  against  perjury,  nothing  can  be 
conceived  more  denunciatory,  more  truly  terrific.  Is  it  fair — is  i'.  lo- 
gical, to  draw  from  the  premises  a  ».onclusion  so  vituperative  1 

To  force  a  shadow  of  uniformity,  the  thirty-nine  articles  were  drawn 
up  by  the  church  of  England,  and  the  clergy  of  that  church,  by  a  cruel 
tyranny  over  conscience,  compelled  to  swear  to  them.    Many  eminent 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGIO^f.  191 

divines  of  that  church  have  taught  that  the  articles  are  not  to  be 
BWorn  to  with  unqualified  assefft,  but  that  the  mental  reservation, "  as 
I  understand  them," is  allowed  :  while  the  sovereign  lord,  or  lordess, 
of  church  and  state,  and  many  no  less  eminent  divines,  have  insisted 
that  the  articles  must  be  sworn  to  with  the  most  entire  and  unqualifi- 
ed submission.  Is  this,  in  my  friend's  estimation,  the  reverence  due 
to  the  solemnity  of  an  oath  ■?  or  is  it  not  taking  the  holy  name  in 
vain  1  Catholic  priests  in  this  country  take  no  oath.  I  took  none 
The  first  oath  I  took  was  one  of  allegiance  to  the  United  States,  ab 

i"uring  all  foreign  potentates,  &c.,  as  the  oath  is  couched.  This  oatf, 
took  in  the  hands  of  Judges  John  and  Thomas  Buchanan,  in  Fred- 
erick, Maryland.  I  also  took  an  oath,'  several  years  afterwards,  when 
consecrated  a  bishop,  to  testify  my  belief  in  and  failhfnl  adherence  to 
.he  doctrines  of  my  church.  This  was  a  further  confirmation  of  the 
oath  which  I  had  previously  taken.     This  is  no  immorality. 

We  arc  again  referred  to  a  change  in  the  ^ doctrine^  of  the  church. 
•The  second  council  of  the  Lateran,"  so  says  Mr.  C.  '•'■forbade  the 
marriage  of  the  clergy,  whereas  nothing  was  more  common  in  the  first 
eight  centuries  than  for  priests  to  marry. ^^  Now,  in  the  first  place, 
celibacy  is  no  part  of  Catholic  doctrine,  at  all.  It  is  not  an  article 
of  faith.  The  pope  could,  to-morrow,  change  that  law,  and  allow 
the  Roman  Catholic  clergy,  as  the  Greek  priests  do,  to  marry.  It  is 
one  of  the  bright  features  of  our  ministry,  that  the  time  and  means, 
which  the  care,  and  support  of  a  family  would  engross,  are  devoted  by 
a  priest  to  the  advantage,  spiritual  and  temporal,  of  his  flock.  Marriage 
is  a  good,  wise,  and  noble  institution.  "  Increase  and  multiply,"  is  the 
command  of  God.  But  we  hold  that  it  is  more  perfect,  or  as  St.  Paul 
says,  "  IT  IS  good"  for  the  "Priests  of  the  Lamb"  to  abstain.  God, 
for  whose  sake  they  make  the  sacrifice,  will  sustain  them  through  temp- 
tation. Keep  thyself  chaste,  says  St.  Payl  to  Timothy,  1st  Ep.  ch. 
v.  21.  Again,  St.  John  says:  "And  I  heard  a  voice  from  heaven,  as 
the  voice  of  harpers  harping  on  their  harps,  and  they  sung  as  it  w^re 
a  new  canticle,  before  the  throne,  and  before  the  four  living  creatures 
and  the  ancients;  and  no  man  could  say  the  canticle,  but  those  hun- 
dred and  forty-four  thousand,  who  were  purchased  from  the  earth. 
These  are  they  who  were  not  defiled  with  women :  for  they  are  vir- 
gins. These  follow  the  Lamb  whithersoever  he  goeth.  These  were 
purchased  from  among  men,  the  first-fruits  to  God  and  to  the  Lamb : 
and  in  their  mouth  there  was  found  no  lie;  for  they  are  without  spot 
before  the  throne  of  God."  What  does  all  this  mean  1  Is  it  not  evi- 
dently the  highest  eulogy  that  could  be  pronounced  on  the  state  to 
which  their  holy  functions,  as  priests  of  the  spotless  Victim  of 
our  altars,  daily  summon  the  clergy  of  our  church  1  I  glory  in  this 
feature  of  our  discipline.  Death  before  dishonor  to  a  virginal  priest« 
hood ! 

In  the  second  place  it  is  a  wide  mistake,  to  say  that  nothing  was 
more  common,  for  the  first  six  hundred  years,  than  for  priests  to  mar- 
ry. The  general  council  of  Nice  enforced,  by  a  special  enactment, 
the  celibacy  of  the  clergy.  This  was  the  first  general  council  .of  the 
(Catholic  church  ;  and  the  practice,  it  enforced,  was  no  innovation. 
The  councils  of  Neo  Cassarea  and  Ancyra  had,  several  years  previ- 
ously, made  laws  to  this  effect  for  priests  and  deacons.  How  was 
the  cireuiustauce  introduced  into  the  coimcil  of  Nice  T  Several  bish- 
ops, priests  and  deacons,  had  beeu  manied  before  their  ordination.   It 


192  DEBATE    ON    THE 

was  proposed  to  compel  those  who  had  not  voluntarily  returned  to 
singleness  of  life,  to  separate  from  thffir  wires.  P«phnurius,  an  un- 
married bishop,  in  consequence  of  the  abuse  of  the  Manichaeans,  who 
considered  marriage  as  coming  from  the  evil  principle,  dissuaded  the 
council  from  this  course,  and  so  the  bishops  agreed,  for  all  past  mar- 
riages. So  generally,  however,  was  the  celibacy  of  the  Greek  clergy 
then  established,  that  even  Protestant  historians — Mosheim,  1st  vol. 
p.  65, — complain  of  the  melancholy,  morose  and  unsocial  institution, 
in  the  second  century.  "  The  sensual  man,"  says  St.  Paul,  •'  per- 
ceiveth  not  the  things  that  are  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  for  il  isfooUshnest 
to  him,''''  1st  Cor.  ii,  14.  But  of  the  many  curious  things  which  my 
friend  has  said,  most  unwittingly,  in  my  favor,  in  the  course  of  this 
debate,  the  most  curious  of  all  is  that  he  should  have,  himself,  in- 
formed us,  that  for  the  first  six  hundred  years,  one  half  the  canons; 
were  occupied  with  the  regulation  of  the  clergy  as  to  this  affair  of 
celibacy!!  And  why,  if  the  clergj'  were  allowed  to  marry?  Is  not 
this,  independently  of  the  acts  of  these  councils,  which  have  reached 
us,  irresistible  proof  of  the  care  taken  to  obtain  an  unmarried,  a  puro 
clergy  %     This  is  not  immorality. 

Confession' is  not  an  immoral  doctrine.  It  is  a  holy  institution. 
This  I  shall  prove  in  due  course  of  time.  I  agree  with  the  venerable 
bishop  Trevern,  the  learned  author  of  the  "Amicable  Discussion,"  and 
of  the  "Answer  to  Faher's  Difficulties  of  Romanism."  Let  my  friend 
but  study  these  pages  with  sincerity,  and  he,  too,  will  become  a  Catho- 
lic. How  different  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  bishop  of  Strasburgh, 
and  of  the  Protestant  bishop  Onderdonk,  of  Philadelphia.  The  for- 
mer shews  clearly  how  the  most  humble  Catholic  can  have  a  divine 
assurance  for  the  truth  of  his  religion  ;  the  latter,  as  I  have  myself 
heard  him  declare,  in  St.Janies'church,  Philadelphia,  in  the  year  1832, 
(and  his  pastoral  charge  has  been  since  published,  and  it  will  prove 
what  I  here  say,)  teaches  that  not  even  the  most  learned  Protestant 
can  ever  be  positively  sure  that  either  himself  or  his  church  is  right! 
And  yet,  St.  Paul  says,  without  faith  it  is  impossible  to  please  God.  By 
faith,  he  of  course  means  true  faith — and  yet  the  Protestant  bishop  says 
we  never  can  be  sure  that  we  have  that  faith  !  What  becomes  now  of 
the  Protestant  infallibility,  for  which  my  friend  so  strenuously  argued 
to-day  1  The  bishop's  conclusion,  on  Protestant  grounds,  is  more  rea- 
sonable than  Mr.  C.'s.  As  long  as  two  pious  and  able  men,  of  different 
denominations,  after  all  their  efforts  at  truth,  come  to  different  and  op- 
posite conclusions  upon  essential  matters,  how  can  either  say  "  i  am 
right,"  and  "  my  neighbor  is  wrong?"  What,  I  am  asked,  is  the  course 
I  would  pursue  with  one  who  is  not  yet  a  christian,  but  anxious  to  be 
instructed  in  the  evidences  of  Christianity?  Why,  the  course  I  would 
pursue  is  this:  J  would  address  his  reason  alone,  as  long  as  he  has  no 
belter  guide — convince  him  that  the  bible  is,  at  least,  authentic  his- 
tory— and  that  he  can  rely  upon  the  truth  of  the  facts  recorded  in  it, 
as  he  would  on  human  testimony.  I  would  introduce  him  to  Jesus 
Christ,  whose  character  is  there  portrayed,  whose  miracles  are  there 
recorded.  I  would  tell  him  why  he  came  on  earth ;  how  he  founded  a 
church  to  explain  whatever  was  difficult  in  the  bible,  after  having  col- 
lected all  its  books  together,  what  no  man  could  do  for  himself;  how 
he  established  that  church  as  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth,  and 
said  of  its  pastors,  "  He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me ;"  and  when  J 


KOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGIOI^.  193 

had  convinced  him  of  the  authority  of  the  church,  I  would  not  require 
Df  him  to  abjure  reason,  but  I  would  consign  him  to  a  higher  and  safer 
gnide,  that  church,  herself  the  immaculate  bride  of  Christ. 

Now  my  friend's  allusion  to  the  Jew,  brings  a  story  to  my  mind, 
and  I  cannot  answer  his  queries  better  than  by  relating  it.  A  Protes- 
tant and  a  Catholic  clergyman  walking  together,  met  a  Jewish  Rabbi, 
"Well,  Solomon,"  says  the  Protestant  minister,  "here  we  three  are 
met,  and  all  of  different  religions,  which  of  us  is  right?"  "I'll  tell 
thee,"  says  the  Israelite,  "  If  the  Messiah  has  not  come,  I  am  right; 
if  he  has  come,  the  Catholic  is  right;  but  whether  he  has  come  or  not, 
joa  are  wrong."     (A  laugh.) — [Time  expires.] 

Half  past  11  o'clock,  Jt.  M. 
Mr   Campbell  rises — 

I  iShall  respond  to  such  matters  as  have  a  bearing  on  the  question,  as 
soon  as  I  have  finished  my  exposition  of  the  immordl  tendency  pf  the 
Komish  rule  of  faith. 

That  common  cursing  or  damning,  which  offends  our  ears  in  all 
the  lanes  and  streets  and  highways,  is  authorized  in  the  following 
words : 

"  To  curse  insensible  creatures,  such  as  the  wind,  the  rain,  the  years,  the  days 
fire,  &c.,  is  no  blasphemy,  unless  the  one  who  curses,  expressly  connects  them 
in  relation  to  God,  by  saying-,  for  instance,  cursed  be  thejire  of  God,  the  bread 
of  God,"  Sic.     Ligor.  Prax.  Conf.  N.  30. 

Again  :  the  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith  sanctions  a  violation  of  the 
third  commandment. 

: "  To  curse  the  living  is  a  mortal  sin,  when  it  is 

formal;  that  is,  (as  Cajetan  explains  it,)  when  he  who  curses  intends  and  wishes 
a  grievous  evil  to  befall  the  one  he  curses:  but  it  is  no  mortal  sin  to  curse  the 
living,  when  the  curse  pronounced  is  merely  material;  that  is,  wlien  it  is  pro- 
nounced without  any  evil  intention.  And  why  is  it  not  a  mortal  sin? — because 
he  who  curses  a  living  man  does  not  always  intend  to  curse  the  soul,  or  to  dcr 
spise  its  substance,  in  which,  in  an  especial  manner,  the  image  of  God  shines* 
forth,  but  he  curses  the  man  without  considering,  or  reflecting  about  his  soul, 
and  therefore,  in  cursing  him  he  does  not  commit  a  grievous  sin."'    Id.  ib.  29. 

License  is  given  to  violate,  in  some  way  or  other,  every  precept  of 
the  Decalogue.     The  Sabbath  as  a  divine  institution  is  thus  set  aside : 

"As  to  the  obligation  of  hearing 

the  Holy  Thing,"  (which  is  the  popish  epithet  for  attending  mass,)  "  let  the 
penitent  be  questioned  in  regard  to  whether  he  has  omitted  that  Holy  Thi>"G?" 
(to  attend  mass.)  "As  to  servile  works,  let  him  be  asked  how  long  he  has 
worked?  and  what  kind  of  work  he  did  1  for,  according  to  the  doctors  generally, 
tboi-e  who  work  two  houi-s  are  excused  from  grievous  sin;  nay,  other  doctors 
allow  more,  especially  if  the  labor  be  light,  or  if  there  be  some  more  notable 
reason.  Let  him  also  be  asked,  why  he  labored;  whether  it  was  the  custom  of 
the  place,  or  whether  it  was  from  necessity?  Because  poverty  can  excuse  from 
tin  in  working  on  the  Sabbath;  as  the  poor  are  generally  excused,  who,  if  lliey 
do  not  labor  on  the  Sabbath,  cannot  support  themselves  or  their  fiimilies;  as  tliey 
also  are  excused  who  sew  upoh  the  Sabbath,  because  they  cannot  do  it  on  oilier 
da>s."     Id.  ib.  N.  32,  33.     [Synopsis,  pp.  52,  53. 

"Merchandising,  aiid  the  selling  of  goods  at  auction  on  the  Sundays,  is,on  ac- 
count of  its  being  the  general  custom,  altogether  lawful."  "Buyingand  selling 
goods  on  the  Lord's  day  and  on  festival  days,  are  certainly  forbidden  by  the  canon- 
ical law — but  where  the  contrary  custom  prevails,  it  is  excusable."  Id.  ib.  N.  293. 
[Synopsis,  p.  192. 

"  He  who  perjorras  any  servile 
work  on  the  Lord's  day,  or  on  a  festival  day,  let  him  do  penance  three  days  on 
bread  and  water.  If  anv  one  break  the  fasts  prescribed  by  the  church,  let  hira 
io  pejiance  on  bread  and  water  twenty  days." — ["Synopsis,  p.  115. 

R  '     13 


194  DEBATE    ON    THB 

"  The  pope  has  the  ri^^ht  and  thepwoer  to  decree,  (hat  (he  s«ncl[ftca(imi  oftHt 
Lord's  day,  shall  only  continue  aftxo  hours,  and  that  servile  works  may  bi 
done  on  that  day."     Id.  ib.     [Synopsis,  p.   188. 

Cnstom,  indeed,  is  fast  becoming',  as  St.  Liffori  teaches,  an  excuse 
for  any  thing.  The  traditions  of  fathers,  the  canons  of  councils,  the 
decrees  of  popes — all  wear  away  by  the  attrition  of  custom.  Hence,  in 
a  Roman  Catholic  population,  pure  and  unmixed,  there  is  a  degree  of 
grossness  of  immorality,  that  Romanists  themselves  could  not  endure 
in  Protestant  countries.  Even  the  morals  of  New  Orleans  could  not 
be  endured  in  Cincinnati.  There,  it  is  custom  to  go  to  mass  in  the 
morning,  to  muster  at  noon,  and  to  go  to  the  theatre  in  the  evening  on 
the  Lord's  day.  This  is  indeed,  the  custom,  or  something  very  like 
it,  in  all  Roman  Catholic  countries. 

On  stealing,  in  general  the  casuist  directs  as  foUows: 

• "In   respect  to  the  seventh  (■(jnunaiilaifcnt,"  says  the  saint, 

"let  the  confessor  ask  the  penitent  if  he  hasstoltn  iiiiT  tiling?  aifKl  from  whom, 
whether  it  wa»froin  one  person,  or  firom  different  persons'?  whether  he  was  alone, 
or  with  others,  and  whether  it  was  once  or  ofteirer?  liecausc,  if  at  each  time 
he  stole  a  considerable  amount,  at  each  time  he  sinnt  il  luorfcilly.  But  oi»  the 
rontrary.if  at  each  time  he  stole  a  siuaHantount,  then  he  did  not  sin  grievously, 
unless  the  articles  stoleit  came  to  a  considerabPe»niounl;  provided, however,  that 
in  the  beginning,  he  had  iMt  the  intention  of  straling  to  a  large  aiuonnt;  but 
when  the  amount  already  stolen  has  become  considerable,  altliough  be  did  not 
sin  grievously, yet  he  is  bound  onder-a  grievous  sin,  to  resthutloa;  at  least, as  to 
the  last  portions  that  he  stole  by  which  the  anrount  bccacue  considerable.  It  19 
to  be  observed,  however,  that  a  larger  sum  is  required  to  constitute  a  heavy 
amount  in  small  theft*,  and  n>ore  is  required  if  the  things  are  stolen  from  differ- 
ent persons, than  if  they  were  stolen  fronv  the  same  person;  hence,  it  is  said,  that 
in  small  thefts,  which  are  made  at  different  times,  double  the  sum  is  retjuired  to 
constitute  what  is  to  be  considered  a  large  amount.  And  if  a  considerable  time 
intervene  between  the  thefts,  for  instance,  two  months  theB  the  theft  probably 
does  not  amount  to  a  grievous  sin."     Id.  ib.  N.  42. 

On  stealing  to  pay  masses : 

"  If  the  person  b  otibnownT,"  continues  tb* 

*»aint,  "from  whom  another  has  stolen,  the  penitent  is  obliged  to  restitution, 
either  by  having  roasses  said,  or  by  bestowir^  alms  on  the  poor,  or  by  iniikiug 
presents  for  pious  places,"  by  which  the  saint  lueans  churches,  nunneries,  &c. ; 
"and  if  the  person  himself  is  poor,  he  can  retain  the  amoant  stolen  for  the  use 
of  bis  family.  But.  if  the  person  on  whom  the  theft  has  been  coiumitted,  is 
•  known,  to  him  the  restitution  is  to  be  made;  wherefore,  it  is  wonderful,  indeed, 
that  there  are  to  be  found  so  many  confessors  so  ignorant,  that,  although  they 
know  who  the  creditor  is,  enjoin  upon  the  penitent,  that,  of  tiie  stolen  goods, 
which  they  ought  10  restore,  they  bestow  ahns,  or  have  masses.said.  It  is  to  be 
observed,  that  if  any  one  takes  the  property  of  another,  op  retains  it,  under  the 
pre.sumption,that  if  he  were  to  ask  it  of  the  owrier,  he  would  willingly  give  it  to 
him,  he  ought  not  to  be  obliged  to  make  restitution."     Id.  ib.  JV.  44. 

Thus  we  see  theft  can  be  made  available  to  the  behoof  of  priests  io 
saying  masses — what  they  ought  to  s^,  and  by  the  old  canons,  are 
bound  to  say  gratis. 

On  lying.    There  is  a  way  of  making  lying  no  lying  : 

"  Relatively  to   the   ninth  comniandnieni,  of  popery  the 

ei^th,  the  saint  proceeds  as  follows: — "In  regartl  to  the  reparation  of  the  char- 
ftcter  of  a  person,  if  the  fault  of  which  he  has  been  accused,  is  talse,  he  who 
defames  him  is  bound  to  retract.  But  if  the  fault  is  true,  the  defamation  that  is 
given.ought  to  be  looked  upon  in  the  most  favorable  liglit  that  it  can  be  teithont 
lying:  let  the  penitent  say,  for  example,  [by  way  of  excuse,]  "  I  was  deceived, 
I  erred."  Others  also  admit  that  he  can  eqicivocate,  by  saying./ /i«rf, since  every 
sin  is-  a  lie,  as  the  scripture  says.  Again,  by  an  equivocation,  he  may  say  *  I  only 
made  this  up  in  my  head,'  since  all  words  which  proceed  from  the  mird  may  b« 
naid  to  come  from  the  head ;  since*  the  bead  is  taken  for  the  mind."  Id  ib.  N.  4S 
l_Synopsis,  p.  56. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  195 

The  difference  between  insulting  or  dishonoring  one's  paret.ts  and 
a  spiritual  father,  bishop  or  pastor: 

•*  He  who  curses  his  parents,  let  him  do  penance,  on  bread  and  water,  forty 
days.  He  who  insults  his  parents,  three  years.  If  any  one  rebel  a^iiinst  his 
bishop,  pastor,  and  father,  let  him  do  penance  in  a  monastery,  during  bis  whole 
life." — [Synopsi.a,  p.  116. 

Rules  given  to  confessors : 

"The  saint  continues:    "The  confessor 

ought  to  be  extremely  cautious  how  he  hears  the  confession  of  women,  and  he 
ihould  particularly  bear  in  mind  what  is  said  in  the  holy  congregation  of  bishops, 
21,  Jan.  1610.  "Confessors  should  not,  without  necessity,  hear  the  confessiom 
ofwoinen  after  dusk,  or  before  twilight."  In  regard  to  the  prudence  of  a  con- 
lessor,  he  ought,  in  general,  rather  to  be  rigid  with  young  women  in  the  confes- 
sional than  bland;  neither  ought  he  to  allow  them  to  come  to  him  before  confes- 
sion to  converse  with  him;  much  less  should  he  allow  them  to  kiss  his  hands.  It 
is  also  imprudent  for  the  confessor  to  let  his  eyes  wander  after  his  female  peni- 
tents, and  to  gare  upon  them  as  they  are  retiring  from  confession.  The  confes- 
sor should  never  receive  presents  Irom  his  feinaie  penitents;  and  he  should  be 
particularly  careful  not  to  visit  them  at  their  houses,  except  in  case  of  severe  ill- 
ness; nor  should  he  visit  them  then,  unless  he  be  sent  for.  In  this  case  he  should 
be  very  cautious  in  what  manner  he  hears  their  confessions;  therefore  the  door 
should  be  left  open,  and  he  should  sit  in  a  place  where  he  cajj  be  seen  by  others, 
and  he  should  never  fix  his  e3'esupon  the  face  of  his  penitent;  especially  if  they 
be  spiritual  persons,  in  regard  to  whom,  the  danger  of  attraction  is  greater.  The 
venerable  father  Sertorius  Capotus  says.that  the  devil,  in  order  to  unite  spiritu- 
al persons  together,  always  makes  use  of  the  pretext  of  virtue,  that,  being  mu- 
tually affected  by  these  virtues,  the  passion  may  pass  from  their  virtaes  over  to 
their  persons.  Hence,  says  St.  Augustin,  according  to  St.  Thomas,  confessors, 
in  hearing  the  confessions  of  spiritual  women,  ought  to  be  brief  and  rigid ;  neither 
are  they  the  less  to  be  guarded  against  on  account  of  their  being  holy;  for  the 
more  holy  they  are,  the  more  they  attract."  And  he  adds,  "  that  such  persons 
are  not  aware  that  the  devil  does  not,  at  first,  lance  his  poisoned  arrows,  but 
those  only  which  touch  but  lightly  and  thereby  increase  the  affection.  Hence  it 
happens,  that  such  persons  do  no^onduct  themselves  as  they  did  at  first,  like- 
angels,  but  as  if  they  were  clothed  with  flesh.  But,  on  the  contrary,  they  mutu- 
ally eye  one  another,  and  their  minds  are  captivated  with  the  soft  aud  tender  ex 
pressions  which  pass  between  them,  aud  which  still  seem  to  them  to  proceed  from 
the  first  fervors  of  their  devotion :  hence  they  soon  begin  to  long  for  each  other's 
company;  and  thus,  he  concludes,  '  the  spiritual  devotion  is  converted  into  car 
nal.  And,  indeed,  O,  how  many  priests,  who  before  were  innocent,  have,  on  ac- 
count of  these  attractions,  which  began  in  the  spirit,  lost  both  God  and  their 
soul!'  "     Id.  ib.  N.  119. 

The  saint  proceeds:  "Moreover,  the  confessor  ought  not  to  be  so  fond  of 
hearing  the  confessions  of  women,  as  to  be  induced  thereby  to  refuse  to  hear  the 
confessions  of  men.  O,  how  wretched  it  is  to  see  so  many  confessors,  who  spend 
the  greater  part  of  the  day  in  hearing  the  confessions  of  certain  religious  wom- 
en, who  are  called  Bizocat,"  (a  kind  of  secular  nuns,)  "  and  when  they  after- 
wards see  men  or  married  women  coming  to  confession  to  them,  overwhelmed 
in  the  cares  and  troubles  of  life,  and  who  can  hardly  spare  time  to  leave  their 
homes,  or  business,  how  wretched  it  is  to  see  these  confessors  dismiss  them,  say- 
ing, '  /  have  something  else  to  attend  to:  go  to  some  other  confessor"  hence  it 
happens,  that,  not  finding  any  other  confessor  to  whom  to  confess,  they  live  du- 
ring months  and  yeai-s  without  the  sacraments,  and  without  God!''  Id.  ib.  N. 
120.     [Svnopsis,  p.  78. 

The  Romanist  rule  of  faith  both  in  word  and  deed  places  the  Virgin 
Mary  above  Christ,  in  the  religious  homage  of  the  chu;ch. 

"  Nuns,"  says  the  saint,   "  ought  to 

have  a  sjiecial  devotion  towards  St.  Joseph,  towards  their  guardian  angel,  and 
their  tutelary  saint,  and  principally  towards  St.  Michael,  the  universal  patron  of 
all  the  faithful,  'uut  above  all  towards  the  most  holv  Virgin  Mary,  who  is  called  by 
the  church  our  life  and  our  hope;  for  it  is  morally  impossible  for  a  soul  to  advance 
much  in  perfection,  without  a  particular  and  a  certain  tender  devotion  towards 
the  most  holy  mother  of  God."     Id.  ib.  N.  171. 


196  DEBATE    ON    THE 

"  Our  life  and  our  Tiope .'"  These  ■words  are  in  Protestant  faith  and 
Bible  propriety  due  to  the  Lord  alone. — We  cannot  have  two  lives;  and 
two  hopes ;  and  if  Mary  is  our  life  and  hope,  the  Lord  Jesus  is  not 
I  before  alluded  to  this  person  under  the  Roman  name  of  a  being  call 
ed  "  the  mother  of  God  ;"  which  my  opponent,  as  his  manner  is,  served 
up  rhetorically,  as  if  to  produce  a  sympathy  in  favor  of  the  superstitious 
veneration  of  his  party.  He  had  not,  however,  a  Roman  Catholic 
audience.  1  meant  no  disrespect  to  any  person.  1  know  that  the  more 
inteV.igent  Romanists  discard  the  phrase  as  too  gross  and  unauthorized. 
There  is  no  being  in  the  universe,  say  they,  who  ought  to  be  called 
the  mother  of  God.  1  had  in  my  eye  at  the  moment  some  wretched  de- 
signs in  some  Roman  churches,  a  scandal  to  any  christian  people :  a 
sort  of  family  group,  in  which  there  is  the  picture  of  a  venerable  old 
man,  said  to  represent  the  Father  of  the  universe — next  an  old  woman, 
the  image  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  between  them  the  picture  of  the 
"  holy  child,  Jesus."  It  has  disgusted  the  more  intelligent  Romanists. 
This  family  of  divinities  is  much  more  in  the  style  of  the  Pantheon,  or 
the  poetry  of  Hesiod,  than  in  the  spirit,  or  letter,  or  taste  of  Christianity. 

While  on  thiq»subject  we  shall  hear  the  moral  theology  of  the  church 
on  the  use  of  images ;  and,  first,  of  the  use  of  the  virgin  Mary's  image 

"  Lt-t  him,  who  is  in  the  habit  of  blaspheniiiig^,  be  advised  to  make  the  si^u  ol 
the  cross  [f]  teu  or  fifteen  times  a  day,  upon  the  ground  with  his  tongue:  and 
thrice  every  morning,  to  say  to  the  most  blessed  Virgin:  '  O,  my  Lordess!    give 
•  me  patience.'  "     Id.  ib.  N.  16.    S^-nopsis,  pp.  44,  45. 

"  Daily  to  visit  the  most  holy  sacrament,  and  the  image  of  t^e  most  holy  Mary, 
to  beg  of  them  the  grace  of  perseverance."     Id.  ib.  N.  14. 

"  O  my  Lordess,  give  me  patience !"  Is  not  this  idolatry  1  To  beg 
of  the  image  of  the  virgin  the  grace  of  perseverance  ! ! !  No  wonder 
that  these  folks  find  it  expedient  to  expunge  the  second  commandment, 
which  says,  "Thou  shalt  not  worship- an  image" — no,  "Thou  shalt 
not  bow  down  to  it."  But  we  shall  hear  the  directions  given  concern- 
ing the  divine  mother: 

"  The  saint  now  proceeds  to  give  instruction  to  the  pa- 
rish priest  how  to  lead  his  flock  in  the  way  of  "  salvation.'"  "  Let  him  be  watch- 
ful," says  he,  "  to  render  his  flock  studious  in  their  devotion  tovvanis  the  Virgin 
Mary,  by  declaring  to  them  how  merciful  this  DIVINE  MOTHER  is  in  succor- 
ing those  who  are  (i€rou<  (o /ler."  Id.  c.  x.  N.  216.  "Therefore,"  continues 
the  saint,  "  let  him  intimate  to  them,  that  they  daily  recite,  in  common  with  their 
families,  five  decades  of  the  Rosary ;  that  they  fast  upon  Saturday,  and  celebrate 
Novenas  upon  the  festivals  of  our  Lordess  (nostrae  Dominfe.)  Lastly,  and  above 
all,  let  the  parish  priest  intimate  to  his  flock,  that  they  become  accustomed  often 
to  commend  themselves  to  God,  begging  of  him  holy  perseverance  through  the 
merits  of  Jesus  Christ  and  of  Mary."     Id.  ib.  ' 

"  A  certain  image  of  tn* 

Redctmer,"  so  says  the  saint,  "  once  upon  a  certain  occasion,  spoke  to  the  ven- 
erable brother  Bernard  of  Corlion,  wno  begged  of  the  image  to  let  bmi  know 
whether  it  wished  him  to  learn  to  read?  and  the  crucijix  ansicered, '  What  wil 
it  avail  thee  to  learn.to  read?  What  are  books  to  thee?  I  am  thy  book, — this  is 
enough  for  thee."     Id.  ib.  N.  220. 

"  IVow,  that  this  is  the  very  kind  of  reading  that  papists,  or  at  least,  those  vho 
wish  to  be  saints,  are  addicted  to,  let  us  turn  to  tne  great  Bernard,  and  hear 
what  he  says  on  tne  subject  of  such  books.  This  saint,  speaking  of  the  Romish 
churches,  exclaims,  "  There  is  so  great,  and  sucli  an  astonishing  variety  of  dif- 
ferent figures  (images)  presented  on  all  sides,  to  the  view,  that  the  people  prefer 
reading  upon  the  marble  stones,  than  reading  in  books,  and  t)  spend  the  whole 
day  in  wondering  at  these  things,  rather  than  in  meditating  upon  the  Law  of 
God."  Bernard,  Apol.  p.  992.  The  same  saint  says,  "The  bishops  excite  the 
devotion  of  n  carnal  minded  people  by  corporal  ornaments,  because  they  cannot 
do  it  by  spiritual."     Id.  ib.     The  saint  does  not  mean  that  their  devotion  is  ex- 


SOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  197 

.^ited  by  such  shows,  for  just  before,  he  said,  that  these  carnal  minded  people 
*  preferr''d  spending  the  whole  day  in  wondering  at  tliesc  thing?,  rather  than 
to  be  meditating  on  the  law  of  God."  He  could  nave  meant  nothing  else  there- 
fore, than  that  these  splendid  images  were  placed  in  tlie  churches  under  the 
PRETENCE  of  exciting  dovotion,  w-hile  the  real  object"  was,  that  the  "  foolish 
people,"  (as  he  calls  them,)  "  might  bestow  a  gift."  Id.  ib.  "  O  Crux  ave, 
gpes  unica!"  '•  Hail,  O  Cross,  our  only  hope!"  as  exclaims  the  Romish  church 
.in  her  "  BREVIARY." 

— — — ^— — ^-^— — •'  Besides  the  little  images  of 

Christ  crucified,  and  of  the  Blessed  Virgin,"  continues  the  saint,  "which  the 
priest  ought  to  be  careful  to  place  near  the  sick  persori,  if  it  can  be  done,  let 
liim  also  place  before  his  eyes  large  images  of  the  Mother  of  God,  and  the  Re* 
deemer,  tnat  the  sick  man,  turn  which  way  he  will,  may  see  them  and  commend 
himself  to  them."     Id.  ib.  N.  235. 

So  much  for  this  lesson  on  the  morality  of  the  Romanist  rule  of 
faith.  On  these  matters  we  have  not  time  to  comment.  For  those 
who  think  they  need  a  comment,  my  worthy  friend  knows  how  to 
manage  the  cause  admirably  !  His  talents  suit  this  exigency.  He  is 
fluent  in  all  the  dogmas  of  Catholicism.  To  these  he  has  devoted 
many  years  and  is  a  good  judge  of  a  certain  class  of  human  nature. 
He  knows  the  power  of  a  laugh — an  anecdote — a  sigh — a  complimen; 
— a  picture — and,  above  all,  he  knows  how  much  it  weighs,  with  one 
class,  to  say,  with  a  triumphant  air,  "There's  logic  for  you  !"  "what 
an  argument  is  that !"  "I  have  proved  it  now  !"  "  this  is  sound  logic  !" 
"my  friend  Mr.  C.  feels  it — it  is  the  badness  of  his  cause — my  cause 
is  so  good,  so  ancient,  so  venerable,  so  holy,  so  catholic!"  &c.  &c.  I 
say,  in  this  sort  of  rhetoric,  my  learned  opponent  is  an  adept.  It  has 
only  one  fault,  it  is  too  luscious  sometimes,  and  he  lays  it  on  rather 
thick,  to  stick  long  upon  the  audience.  He  is  performing  his  part 
nobly  !  For  myself,  I  regard  all  this  as  a  grave,  serious,  scriptural  and 
rational  discussion;  I  expect  the  good  feelings  of  my  audience,  of 
which  I  am  already  conscious,  only  by  addressing  myself  to  their  un- 
derstanding, and  in  the  cool  argumentative  dignity  of  reason,  fact,  and 
argument.  But  really,  no  man,  in  my  knowledge,  could  sustain  the 
Romanist  cause  better  than  my  learned  and  ingenious  respondent;  and 
if  he  fails,  Roman  Catholicism  in  the  West  need  not  look  for  an  able» 
defendant.  \ 

My  friend  has  admitted  the  seven  methods  of  electing  popes,  but 
says  it  is  no  matter  how  they  are  chosen.  Americans  !  How  would  you 
relish  such  doctrine  in  respect  to  your  governors,  judges,  and  presi- 
dents ?  If  some  city  or  county  in  this  state  should  elect  a  governor 
for  the  whole  state,  would  it  make  no  difference  to  you  1  Should  your 
chief  magistrate  be  elected  by  a  mob,  by  a  party,  or  by  force,  or  brib- 
ery, would  you  say  it  matters  not — the  virtue  is  in  the  office,  no  matter 
how  the  incumbenl  has  come  into  itT  ! 

The  "  Palladium"  and  "  Baptist  Banner"  prove  as  much  against 
Protestantism,  and  for  Catholicism,  as  they  deal  in  ribaldry  and  per- 
sonal abuse.  If  these  are  arguments  on  which  the  bishop  relips,  they 
may  be  goDd  authority  for  him;  but,  for  myself,  I  need  no  such  logic, 
and  my  cause  disdains  such  auxiliaries.  He  has  great  use  for  Unita- 
rians also,  and  sometimes  for  Universalists,  and  even  Quakers ;  but 
in  his  last  argument  he  has  mistaken  the  point.  These  all  appeal,  in 
their  controversies,  to  the  bible  alone,  just  as  the  Jansenists  and  Jesu- 
its, thp  Dominicans,  Bernardites,  Benedictines,  Franciscans,  &c.  &c. 
whil'.-  they  have  disliked  and  opposed  one  another,  all  acknowledge  the 
po'^e  as  supreme  head  of  the  church,  the  judge  of  controversies. 


198  DEBATE    ON    THE 

I  am  glad  that  he  hasal  last  admitted  that  the  Jansenists  in  all  essen 
tials  are  Catholics,  and  that  they  are  repudiated  only  for  a  difference 
of  opinion.  But  where  now  are  his  objections  against  Du  Pin  1  He 
objected  to  him  that  he  was  a  Jansenist,  as  if  a  difference  in  opinion 
destroys  the  credibility  of  a  witness — a  principle  that  forever  roots  up 
all  history;  for  no  one  upon  this  principle  is  authentic,  unless  he  be  a 
Roman  Catholic ;  nor  then,  unless  a  Jesuit,  and  this  is  equivalent  to 
saying,  that  no  one  is  authentic  unless  he  bear  witness  for  him. — [Time 
expired.] 

Twelve  o'clock,  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

I  shall  begin  where  my  friend  left  off.  I  am  charged  with  appeal- 
ing to  the  feeling,  and  not  to  the  reason  of  my  hearers  :  "  my  rhetoric 
is  too  luscious  ;  I  lay  it  on  too  tliick ;  it  won't  stick,"  &c.  &c.  Well ! 
if  my  rhetoric  is  too  luscious,  that  of  my  friend  is  too  insipid ;  if 
mine  is  too  thick,  his  is  too  thin.  The  fallacy  it  would  cover,  grins 
through  the  flimsy  gossamer :  the  weakest  eyes  can  see  it  beneath 
the  veil.  But  I  trust,  I  need  not  offer  any  vindication  of  my  argu- 
ments to  this  assembly.  They  are  able,  and,  I  thank  God,  willing, 
too,  to  judge  for  themselyes.  They  see  that  all,  or  the  main  force  of 
my  friend  consists  of  two  renegade  priests.  Smith  and  Du  Pin. 
These  are  the  two  pillars  of  his  logic.  The  published  volume  will 
shew  how  superior  and  how  honest  are  mine.  In  the  oral  debate,  I  ad- 
dress the  judgment,  without  neglecting  the  heart :  and  if  I  did  pre- 
sent my  argument  chiefly  to  the  former,  it  would  be  because  of  an 
observation  of  the  celebrated  John  Randolph,  in  the  Virginia  conven- 
tion for  altering  the  constitution  of  the  state.  Speaking  of  my  learn- 
ed opponent,  who  was  a  delegate  to  that  convention,  Randolph  said, 
"  He  had  politics  in  his  heart  and  religion  in  his  head."  I  cannot 
vouch  for  the  authenticity  of  the  anecdote,  I  have  just  heard  it.  I  hope 
il  was  not  founded  in  fact — [Mr.  C.  explained — Mr.  Randolph  had 
never  said  so  to  him.]  I  proceed  to  rnore  important  matters.  I  did 
not  pretend  to  say  that  an  informal  election  had  any  force.  But  that 
any  form  on  which  the  entire  church  agreed,  according  to  the  majority 
principle  governing  our  own  elections,  was  valid.  It  was  Christ  who 
drafted  the  constitution  of  our  church.  I  do  not  much  like  to  see  any 
comparison  instituted  between  it  and  the  works  of  human  legislators. 
But  if  closely  examined,  it  will  be  found  to  contain  the  excellencies, 
while  it  excludes  the  defects  of  the  most  popular  forms  of  civil  go- 
vernment. We  have  a  perfect  feature  of  the  Republican  Model,  in 
this,  that  with  us,  merit  is  the  grand  criterion  of  fitness  for  office.  No 
favoritism  is  allowed.  No  matter  how  humble  the  parentage  or  ob- 
scure the  kindred  of  the  individual,  virtue,  talent  and  common  sense 
are  sure,  sooner,  or  later,  to  elevate  him  to  any  situation  he  may  be 
advised. to  accept.  The  church  often  selects  her  chief  officers,  as 
God  did  David,  "  from  the  flocks  of  sheep,"  Ps.  7.  viii.  70.  from  the 
humblest  walks  of  life.  It  is  to  this  system,  of  giving  merit  a  fair 
field,  that  we  are  indebted  for  the  brightest  ornaments  in  civil  so- 
ciety, a  Curran,  chosen  for  his  intelligent  blue  eye,  his  wit  and 
archness,  from  among  his  playmates,  when  "  ihey  that  won,  laughed, 
and  they  that  lost  cheated  ,•"  as  is  very  often  the  case. 

To  finish  the  conversion  of  the  Jew,  where  I  discontinued  my  ar- 
gument, aj  half  past  oleven,  on  different  principles.     He  knew  there 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  199 

was  a  synagogue  which  the  people  were  bound  to  consult,  by  the  ex- 
press command  of  God,  and  that  it  was  no  servility,  it  was  blasphemj 
against  God  and  often  \asited  with  the  he'aviest  penalties,  even  in  this 
life,  to  oppose  its  authority,  or  to  contradict  its  teaching.  He  is 
therefore  prepared  to  hear  of  authority  in  religion — in  fact,  the  syna- 
gogue v.as  a  type  of  the  church,  its  introduction — as  the  church  is 
the  fulfilment  and  the  consummation  of  the  teaching  and  testimony 
of  the  LAW.  The  Jew  having  had  reason  to  question  the  truth  of  his 
religion,  for  which,  he  remembers  he  had  often  read,  a  better  was  to 
be  substituted,  and  aware  that  the  time  marked  so  distinctly  by  the 
prophets  for  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  has  long  ago  past,  he  looks 
for  any  religious  society,  that  can  illustrate  the  splendid  prophecies  of 
Isaiah,  respecting  the  catholicity,  or  universal  diffusion  and  the  dura- 
tion of  the  church,  from  the  time  of  the  crucified  one.  He  has  only 
to  open  his  eyes  to  see  that  the  Catholic  church  extends  the  dominion 
of  Christ,  the  limits  of  his  spiritual  kingdom  from  sea,  to  sea.  Then 
he  looks  at  the  other  denominations.  He  finds  none  of  the  qualities  of 
such  a  kingdom,  fh  them.  They  are  not  Catholic,  they  are  not  old, 
they  are  not  unifoAn.  They  are  the  contrary  of  all  this.  This  is  enough 
for  him.  He  uses  his  reason,  thus  far,  alone,  because  he  is  not  yet 
baptized.  Like  the  wise  men,  he  follows  the  light  of  that  star,  until 
he  reaches  Jerusalem — when  its  light  fails  him,  there,  as  the  star  did 
them,  he  asks,  as  they  did,  of  authority,  where  the  truth  may  be  found, 
and  reason  and  revelation  concur  to  shew  it  to  him  in  the  church. 
He  consigns  himself  to  its  guidance,  he  becomes  a  Catholic — and 
reason  tells  him,  every  day,  he  has  done  right.  He  lives  and  he  dies 
without  a  doubt  of  the  soundness  of  his  decision,  for  this  blessed 
security  is  the  distinctive  character  of  the  Catholic,  All  other  creeds 
based  on  the  essential  maxim  of  their  fallibility,  leave  the  human 
mind,  in  life  and  death,  a  prey  to  the  most  torturing  anxiety.  But  I 
have  not  done  with  this  very  instructive  incident  in  the  discussion. 
If  the  Jew  witnesses  an  occasional  scandal  in  the  church,  he  calls  to 
mind  how  Adam  fell  in  Eden,  and  Aaron  fell,  at  the  foot  of  the  smok- 
ing Sinai,  and  Heli  and  his  Sons,  the  priests,  fell  in  Silo,  and  that 
Christ  said  not,  reject  a  religion,  whose  ministers  have,  personally, 
transgressed,  but  on  the  contrary,  that  he  said ;  "  Upon  the  chair  of 
Moses  have  sitten  the  Scribes  and  the  Pharisees.  All  things  therefore, 
whatsoever  they  shall  say  to  you,  (Aserve  ye  and  do  ye  .■  but  according  to 
hei)  works,  do  ye  not,  for  they  say  and  do  not.  Thus  truth  is  not 
ibandoned  ;  if  the  bad  liver  meets  his  merited  doom. 

I  now  come  to  all  that  farrago  of  the  Renegade  Smith'' s  translation 
jf  Liguori.  My  friend  says  the  Catholic  rule  is  immoral.  He  ap- 
proached this  topic  with  so  much  reluctance,  and  with  so  many  stnig- 
gles,  that,  conscious  of  his  having  nothing  true  to  produce  agains 
Catholic  morality,  I  was  going  to  say  to  him,  "speak  out."  But  I  didn't, 
and  now  he  has  said  all.  Well,  what  does  it  amount  to  ?  Why  to 
this,  that  the  Catholic  church  js  blackened,  but  beautiful  (Nigra  sum, 
sed  formosa,  as  the  spouse  says  in  the  canticle).  She  is,  though 
misrepresented,  fair,  though  slandered,  pure.  If  a  Catholic  were 
always  wliat  his  church  teaches,  and  the  sacraments  she  is  appointed 
by  Christ  to  minister,  give  him  grace,  to  be,  he  would  be  an  orna- 
ment to  human  nature,  as  well  as  to  his  faith.  But  "  the  Catholic 
rule  is  immoral  and  dispenses  with  the  law  of  God."  No;  it  enfor- 
ces dreadful  penalties  here  and  eternal  torments  hereafter,  for  a  viola- 


200 


WEBATE    0?r    THE 


tion  of  the  law.  If  her  ministers  make  any  mitigation  of  her  strict 
code  of  morals  in  consequence  of  the  arduous  duties,  weak  healtii, 
or  other  circumstances  of  her  children,  she  teaches  them,  that  if  thp 
alleged  motives  of  such  mitigation  do  not,  indeed,  exist,  it  is  not 
*■'  a  faithful  dispensation,  but  a  cruel  dissipation"  of  the  heavenly  or- 
dinances ;  that  the  priest  has  no  power  but  what  he  derives  from  God, 
and  that  God  will  iniallibly  inflict  all  the  rigors  of  his  vengeance  for 
its  abuse,  as  well  on  the  priest,  as  on  the  people.  If  all  the  priests 
and  bishops  in  the  world  were  to  pronounce  the  words  of  absolution 
over  a  sinner,  in  whose  heart  God  did  not  see  true  sorrow  for  his  fault, 
with  a  sincere  resolution  to  sin  no  more,  the  absolution  would  be  null 
and  void,  and  the  horrid  crime  of  sacrilege  superadded  to  the  previous 
guilt  of  the  transgressor.  The  hope  of  the  hypocrite  shall  perish, 
says  the  scripture.  We  have  a  maxim,  which  must  make  the  pope 
and  bishops  and  priests,  as  well  as  the  laity  tremble,  when  we 
approach  the  dread  tribunal  of  penance.  It  is  this  :  "  a  good  confes- 
sion is  the  key  of  Heaven,  a  bad  one  is  the  key  of  Hell."  How  ad- 
mirable are  the  lessons  read  today  from  Liguori — and  they  were  faith- 
fully rendered  for  a  sinister  motive — and  how  welf  does  the  Catholic 
church  describe  the  perils  and  the  obligations  of  their  sacred  office  to 
her  ministers !  Hence  it  is  that  we  assume  our  religious  robes  and  hear 
confessions  in  the  open  church,  where  are  also  our  confessionals, 
ander  the  eyes  of  all.  If  Liguori  were  the  immoral  man  that  Smith 
would  make  him,  wotlld  he  have  given  such  lessons  to  the  clergy 
and  pointed  out  so  impressively  the  dangerous  consequences  of  a  single 
indiscretion,  or' the  slightest  familiarity  on  the  occasions  to  which  he 
was  adverting]  "I  made  a  covenant  with  my  eyes,  says  Job,  xxxi.  1 
that  I  would  not  so  much  as  think  of  a  virgin ;  for  what  part  should 
God  from  above  have  in  me,  and  what  inheritance  the  Almighty  from 
on  high  ■?"  Liguori  says  :  "  He  that  does  .any  servile  work  pn  the 
Lord's  day,  let  him  do  penance,  three  days,  on  bread  and  water."  To 
what  does  my  friend  object  in  this,  on  the  score  of  immorality  1  Is 
it  the  enforcing  of  the  observance  of  the  sabbath  1  Surely  that  is  not 
immoral.  Is  it  to  the  severity  of  the  penalty  ?  But  did  not  God  ordain 
the  pain  of  death  against  the  man  who  gathered  a  few  sticks  on  the 
sabbath  ]  Liguori  allows  work  on  the  sabbath,  on  certain  occasions. — 
So  do  we. — Doctors  work  on  the  sabbath,  without  sin.  So  do  printers, 
though  I  think  not  always,  especially  when  they  publish  pious  lies 
against  the  Catholics.  "  Which  of  you,  says  Christ,  whose  ox,  or  his 
ass,  falls  into  a  pit,  will  not  quickly  draw  him  out,  on  the  sabbath. 
If  a  house  is  on  fire  on  the  sabbath,  will  not  the  Presbyterian  bell 
ring  and  the  citizens  haul  out  the  hose  and  engines  ?  Will  we' not 
ave  the  harvest,  on  a  Sunday  ?  New  Orleans'  profanity  on  the  sab- 
ath  !  Why,  they  are  not  all  Catholics,  many  of  them  are  infidels  and 
Protestants,  who  there  break  the  sabbath — and  their  sin,  though  bad 
enough,  is  not  so  bad  as  theirs,  who,  as  it  has  been  done  elsewhere, 
meet  in  gangs  for  forgeries  and  other  such  frauds,  on  the  sabbath. 
"  Custom  is  fast  becoming  an  excuse  for  every  thing." — JVo  ichere  doet 
Liguori  say  fhis.  I  call  for  the  original.  Let  Mr.  C.  produce  his 
proof,  if  he  can.  If  he  cannot,  what  will  this  community  think  of  him  1 
"  The  Romanist  rule  of  faith  places  the  Virgin  Mary  above  Christ." 
It  does  no  such  a  thing.  It  says  "  cursed  be  every  Goddess  worship- 
er," while  it  renders  "  honor  to  whom  honor.^^  We  know  and  pro- 
fess that  the  mother  has  no  power  but  what  she  derives  from  the  Son 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION,  201 

To  Him,  we  say :  "  have  mercy  on  us ;"  to  her  "  pray  for  us«"  Mr. 
C.  says,  "  No  being  in  the  universe  should  be  called  mother  of  God.** 
Was  not  Christ  God]  And  does  not  the  gospel  call  Mary,  his  mo- 
ther ]  Did  not  one  hundred  and  fifty  eight  bishops  so  call  her,  in  the 
year  431,  in  the  council  of  Ephesus?  Who  is  the  intelligent  Catho- 
lic, as  my  opponent  states,  who  is  ashamed  of  what  the  gospel  and 
the  church  sanction  1  I  ask  who  is  he  1  Let  us  have  his  name. 
The  streets  of  Ephesus  rung  with  loud  applause  when  the  decision  of 
the  council  was  announced,  vindicating  the  name  and  dignity  of  the 
mother  of  God,  and  the  words  Mnpix  Qutckh;  were  echoed  from  mouth  to 
mouth,  mingled  with  the  most  joyful  and  exulting  cries  of  the  populace, 
to  the  consternation  of  Neslorianism.  'Son!  beiiold  thy  mother!'  werea- 
mong  the  last  words  spoken  by  the  expiring  Savior  on  the  cross.  Will  my 
opponent  call  them  ill  timed  at  that  hour,  when  all  was  consummated  ! 

"The  Catholic  rule  makes  a  distinction  between  mortal  and  venial 
sins."  And  why  should  it  not  1  Does  not  the  bible,  which  propor- 
tions the  penalty  to  the  offence,  does  not  the  civil  law,  which  punish- 
es not  every  offence  alike,  does  not  common  sense  point  out  the  dis- 
tinction? Is  it  as  great  a  sin  for  a  child  to  tell  a  little,  white  lie  to 
excuse  itself,  as  for  a  son  to  whet  the  razor  and  cut  his  father's  throat  ? 
I  am  sensible  that  a  lie  is  never  innocent.  Nor  do  I  excuse  it  under 
any  circumstances — but  it  is  of  various  shades  of  guilt,  according  to 
the  circumstances  when  it  is  uttered.  I  know  of  national  legislatures 
which  give  a  bribe  of  forty  pounds  per  annum  to  an  apostate  priest,  to 
tempt  him  by  filthy  lucre  to  act  against  his  conscience — and  which 
not  so  many  years  ago,  encouraged  a  son  to  turn  Protestant,  by  em- 
powering him  to  take  his  father  s  estate  and  turn  both  his  aged  pa- 
rents and  with  them  his  brothers  and  sisters,  if  they  persisted  in  be- 
ing Catholics,  out  of  doors,  and  it  would  be  easy  for  me  to  prove  that 
this  law  was  passed  by  many  Protestant  ministers,  and  that  it  was  not 
over  scrupulous  inpoini  of  morality  in  papistical  distinction  between 
mortal  and  venial  sins  ;  but  let  us  have  more  of  Smithes  translation  of 
liiguori,  he  says  '  let  stolen  money  be  paid  for  masses  ■?  No ;  he  says 
first,  let  the  rightful  owner  be  hunted  out  by  the  penitent  thief,  and 
to  him  let  the  restitution  be  made.  If  he  can  be  no  longer  found,  let 
the  money  be  given  for  masses,  for  his  spiritual  benefit,  or  distributed, 
for  his  sake,  in  alms  to  the  poor,  and  what  better  use  could  be  made 
of  it — what  better  counsel  given  ? 

Another  proof  of  Catholic  immorality  is  that  we  are  bound  to  go 
once  a  year  to  confession  !  Where  the  immorality  of  this  is,  I  cannot 
conceive.  Is  it  not  good  to  be  obliged  to  examine,  at  least,  once  a 
year,  if  not  more  frequently,  the  state  of  our  consciences  and  to  con- 
fess ourselves  sinners  1  Is  not  this  an  admirable  institution  for  the 
acquiring  of  the  best  kind  of  knowledge,  the  knowledge  of  oneself? 
Is  it  not  worthy  of  God  1  Is  it  not  God  himself  that  instituted  it  1 
Did  he  not  leave  to  his  church,  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing  from 
sin,  when  he  said  to  his  apostles,  after  having  mysteriously  breathed 
upon  them  and  given  them  the  Holy  Ghost,  "  Whose  sins  you  shall 
forgive,  they  are  forgiven,  and  whose  sins  you  shall  retain,  they  are 
retained :  Whatever  you  shall  bind  on  earth,  it  shall  be  bound  in 
Heaven,  and  whatever  you  shall  loose  on  earth,  it  shall  be  loosed  in 
Heaven."  John  xx.  22,  23.  And  my  friend  quoted  St.  Thomas 
Acjuin,  and  St.  Augustin,  as  well  as  Liguori,  for  the  holy  rules  the 
priest  must  observe,  in  hearing  confessions.     That  establishes  the  im 

26 


202  DEBATE   Oy   THE 

portant  fact,  that  in  the  last  century,  and  in  the  fourteenth,  and  as  far 
back  as  the  fifth  age,  the  practice  of  confession  existed,  as  it  does  at 
the  present  day.  In  every  age  from  the  time  of  Christ  it  has  been 
practised,  and  experience  has  proved  it  the  most  effectual  restraint 
that  religion  has  ever  imposed  upon  vice,  on  passion,  and  on  human 
frailty.  Who  can  tell  what  crimes  it  has  arrested  ]  What  virtue  it  has 
preserved  and  purified  1  What  restitutions,  of  reputation  and  of  for- 
tune it  has  caused  to  be  made  1  How  many  sinners  it  has  stopt  in  the 
down-hill  path  to  destruction  1  Voltaire  and  Chillingworth  and  a  hun- 
dred others,  not  Catholics,  have  pronounced  the  most  splendid  eulo- 
gies on  confession.  These  disinterested  witnesses  will  furnish  you 
ample  proof  on  this  point.  But  my  friend  before  he  closed,  uttered 
one  word,  while  he  read  from  the  catechism  of  the  council  of  Trent 
^^fixing  aprice,  ^c."  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin.  Now  in  the  name  of 
truth,  in  the  name  of  this  community,  I  ask  him  for  the  proof,  for  1 
pronounce  it  absolutely  false. 

Mr.  C.  explained  that  he  did  not  say  it  was  done  by  the  council  of 
Trent. 

He  says  that  we  have  exalted  the  confessional  to  an  equality  with 
the  throne  of  grace.  Well  might  it  be  the  footstool  of  that  throne, 
if  its  pure  principles  were  carried  out.  On  the  throne,  or  in  the  con- 
fessional, it  is  the  same  God  that  pardons  the  penitent  sinner. — [Time 
expired.] 

Three  o'clock,P.    M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

The  gentleman  challenged  me  this  morning  upon  an  important 
point,  viz.  that  Protestants  cannot  make  an  act  of  faith — that  is,  be 

ferfectly  certain  in  their  belief  of  the  holy  scriptures,  or  of  Jesus  Christ, 
accept  the  challenge.  It  now  only  remains  for  him  to  appoint  the 
time  when,  and  the  place  where,  and  I  will  meet  him  on  that  point 
But  that  is  not  the  question  for  to-day.  Let  him  not  think  to  take  me 
off,  by  raising  incidental  and  foreign  questions.  They  may  remove 
the  ennui  of  the  audience  for  a  while ;  but  his  time  would  have  been 
better  spent  in  answering  my  allegations  on  the  great  question.  1 
have  heard  not  one  answer,  as  yet,  to  the  question,  "  What  gives  gen- 
eral councils  their  infallibility  V  and  various  other  points  of  great 
moment  to  his  cause :  to  which  he  had  better  attend,  than  to  propose 
new  debates.  I  will  remind  him  of  another  question  which  he  had 
better  solve.  '  How  can  a  thousand fallibles  make  one  infallible  ? '  Do 
they,  by  meeting  together,  become  infallible "?  or,  by  an  ecclesiastic 
combination,  give  out  infallibility  1  This  would  have  been  more  in- 
structive than  much  of  what  the  gentleman  has  given  us.  He  obser 
ved  at  one  time  that  the  Jansenists  were  a  Roman  Catholic  sect.  But 
again,  he  says,  that  they  are  not  Roman  Catholics  at  all !  To  pre- 
serve the  union  of  the  church,  their  plan  is  a  very  easy  one.  W'hen 
persons  dissent,  cut  them  off.  While  Jansenists  agree  with  the 
majority  of  the  church,  call  them  good  Catholics  :  when  they  dissent 
as  they  do  in  some  very  cardinal  matters,  call  them  heretics  in  the 
bosom  of  the  church :  but  not  of  it.  But  the  gentleman's  explana- 
tion of  the  council  of  Trent  will  never  satisfy  Protestants.  The  coun- 
cil of  Trent  at  one  session,  had  forty-eight  bishops,  forty-five  of 
whom  were  very  ordinary  men.  They  decided  that  the  Apocrypha 
and  the  Vulgate  were  authentic ;  that  the  Latin  Vulgate  is  the  true  auci 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  203 

only  authentic  copy,  more  authentic  than  the  Greek  original.  These 
matters  had  often  been  discussed  before  amongst  Romanists;  bat  were 
finally  adjudicated  by  the  council  of  Trent.  The  modern  doctrine  of 
Catholics  is,  that  a  simple  majority  is  infallible.  "That  the  opin- 
ions adopted  by  the  majority  of  the  bishops  are  for  an  infallible  rule 
of  faith."  So  says  the  worthy  bishop  of  Strasburg;  but  the  proof  is 
another  matter.  Now  the  present  doctrine  is,  that  twenty-five  bish- 
ops, being  the  qp.jority  of  forty-eight,  are  infallible.  The  opinion  of  a 
majority  of  a  council,  then,  is  the  essence  of  infallibility.  Father 
Paul,  who  writes  the  history  of  the  council  of  Trent,  a  good  Catholic, 
truly  !  says,  '  beardless  youths  were  sent  to  that  council  by  the  pope 
to  obtain  majorities  for  his  measures — That  the  pope  sent  packed  ju- 
ries, who  in  every  question  were  expected  to  support  his  measures.' 
So  provoked  was  the  good  Catholic  with  the  aberrations  of  Trent,  that 
he  solemnly  asserts  that  the  bishops  of  Trent  were  "  a  pack  of  incar- 
nate demons."  I  think  I  quote  his  very  words.  He  was  complaining 
that  the  pope  had  hired  and  sent  ofi"  young  men  from  every  part  of 
the  empire  to  vote  as  he  pleased  to  dictate.  So  much  for  the  infalli- 
bility of  oecumenical  councils. 

My  friend  has  pronounced  glowing  encomiums  upon  the  pure  vir- 
ginity of  the  Roman  priesthood,  and  has  extolled  the  purity  of  celib- 
acy, as  essential  to  perfect  holiness.  That  these  priests  have  not  been 
such  immaculate  purities,  half  the  decrees  of  these  very  councils  attest. 
Half  their  legislation  is  about  the  specks  and  blemishes  of  this  vir- 
gin priesthood,  as  if  they  assembled  for  the  purpose  of  hiding  their 
shame.  The  bishop  quoted  Rev.  xiv.  4.  and  was  not  ashamed  before 
this  audience  to  apply  it  to  marriage,  t  blushed  for  our  audience, 
and  could  not  but  be  shocked  with  the  freedom  of  attack  upon  the  or- 
dinance of  God.  Marriage  is  the  oldest  and  most  venerable  institu- 
tion m  the  history  of  man.  God  himself  instituted  and  celebrated  it, 
on  the  flowery  banks  of  Eden  in  the  state  of  primeval  innocence  and 
bliss.  It  was  then  and  there  said  :  "  It  is  not  good  for  man  to  be  alone." 
I  believe  with  Paul  that  marriage  is  honorable  in  all.  And  as  for  pu- 
rity ;  earth  knows  no  purer,  no  holier  state  than  that  of  holy  wedlock. 
And  could  I  tell — or  dare  I  tell  before  this  assembly,  but  half  that  I 
have  learned  of  that  virgin  state  of  which  my  friend  has  spoken  with 
such  warmth ;  he  would  be  slow  to  learn  who  could  not  perceive, 
that  "forbidding  to  marry,"  one  of  Paul's  attributes  of  the  grand 
apostacy,  has  been  the  fans  et  principium,  the  fountain  of  untold  pol- 
lutions in  the  hierarchy  of  Rome.  In  times  of  persecution,  and  of 
great  distress,  it  may,  indeed,  be  prudent,  as  Paul  advised  on  such  oc- 
casions, to  refrain  from  marriage,  and  for  some  great  and  laudable 
purpose,  it  may  be  convenient,  to  prefer  a  single  state  ;  but  that  youth, 
male  or  female,  who  for  the  sake  of  greater  purity  prefers  celibacy, 
has  yet  to  learn  the  very  first  principles  of  both  religion  and  morality ; 
and  is  as  far  out  of  the  tract  of  truth  and  reason,  as  he  that  would  cut 
off  his  own  hands  to  prevent  him  from  plunder. 

It  is  essential,  in  my  opinion,  that  the  bishop  be  a  married  man. 
Indeed,  the  Holy  Spirit  by  Paul  has  decreed,  that  he  should  be  the 
husband  of  one  wife.  As  my  opponent  is  a  bachelor,  I  ought,  per- 
haps to  ask  his  pardon.  Did  he,  indeed,  possess  all  the  other  qual- 
ifications, I  should  withhold  my  vote  to  his  becoming  a  bishop  so  long 
as  he  continued  a  ^^  virgin."  To  preside  over  a  christian  congreija- 
tion,  he  sb  "uld  have  all  a  christian's  feelings  and  experience.     He 


204  rEE*TB  o?r  the 

should  know  experimentally  the  domestic  airections  and  relations. 
He  should  study  human  nature  in  the  bosom  of  his  family.  There  is 
a  class  of  feelings,  which  no  gentleman,  of  single  life,  can  compre- 
hend ;  or  in  which  he  can  sympathise :  and  these  are  essential  to  that 
intimacy  with  all  classes,  sexes  and  duties,  which  his  relations  lo  the 
church  often  impose  on  him.  If  he  does  not  know  how  to  rule  a  sin- 
gle family,  and  to  enter  into  all  its  customs  and  feelings  with  jiracti- 
cal  skill,  how  can  he  take  care  of  the  church  of  ^odl  So  argues 
Paul :  and  so  must  I  reason  and  judge. 

Next  to  his  remarks  against  marriage,  as  necessarily  less  pure  than 
celibacy ;  I  was  sorry  to  hear  the  gentleman  defending  "  white  lies," 
and  "  little  sins."  When  I  think  of  the  nat\ire  cf  sin,  and  the  holy 
and  immutable  laws  of  God,  against  whom  it  is  committed,  I  see  no 
difference  between  one  sin  and  another.  There  may  be  great  and  lit- 
tle sins  as  to  their  temporal  relations  and  consequences  :  but  when  HE 
against  whom  every  sin  is  committed,  and  that  divhie  and  holy  law, 
which  is  violated  in  the  least  offence,  is  considered  ;  we  must  say  with 
the  apostle  James,  "  He  that  offendeth  in  one  point  is  guilty  of  all." 
It  may  be  the  veriest  peccadillo  on  earth :  but  in  Heaven's  account, 
one  sin  would  ruin  a  world,  as  it  has  done,  for  he  that  keeps  the  whole 
law  and  yet  offends  in  the  least  point,  is  guilty  of  all.  He  that  said, 
not  a  jot  or  tittle  of  his  law  shall  fall  to  the  ground — He  that  magni- 
fied his  law  and  made  it  honorable,  will  suffer  no  person  to  add  to — 
to  substract  from,  to  change  or  to  violate  a  single  point  with  impunity. 

I  wish  the  gentleman  would  come  up  to  the  point  and  defend  his 
Catholic  rule,  that  I  might  fully  deliver  myself  on  this  subject;  but  1 
have  as  yet  given  a  very  few  instances  of  the  impurities  and  immoral- 
ities of  his  rule  of  faith.  But  from  the  specimen  given,  I  would  ask, 
does  it  not  teach  the  worship  of  creatures  and  the  images  of  creatures — 
does  it  not  countenance  idolatry?  Does  it  not  command  the  invo- 
cation of  the  spirits  of  dead  men  and  women  1  Are  not  multi- 
tudes of  saints  invoked,  of  whose  abode  in  heaven  there  is  no  witness 
on  earth  ?  Does  it  not  pay  religious  homage  to  beings,  who  by  nature 
are  not  God  1  Does  it  not  blaspheme  the  name  of  God,  and  his  apos- 
tles and  prophets,  who  are  in  heaven?  And,  may  I  not  add— does  it 
not  annul  the  laws  of  God,  and  by  a  system  of  unparalleled  casuistry 
set  aside  every  moral  obligation  ? 

The  gentleman  represented  confession  as  a  christian  duty.  So  it  is; 
but  not  auricular  confession;  not  confession  to  a  priest.  Leo  I.  opened  the 
flood-gates  of  impurity  by  ordering  and  substituting  private  confession 
to  a  priest;  for  public  confession  before  the  whole  congregation.  The 
.ast  entrenchment  against  the  rapid  declensions  of  public  morals  in  the 
fifth  century,  was  ifiroken  down  by  their  dispensing  with  public  for 
secret  confession.  All  sensible  historians,  or,  rather,  commentators 
on  historic  facts,  agree  that  there  was  no  greater  check  to  flagitious 
offences  than  bringing  the  defaulter  before  the  whole  congregation ;  and 
this  being  commuted  into  auricular  confession,  inundated  the  church 
with  unparalleled  impurities  and  immoralities.  "Confess  your  faults 
one  to  another,"  is  not,  whisper  your  faults  into  the  ears  of  your  priest! 
Why  do  not  the  priests,  on  this  their  proof,  confess  their  faults  to  the 
people  ] — confess  to  one  another!  But  this  authorizes  no  man,  no  woman, 
to  degrade  themselves  by  falling  upon  their  knees  before  an  old  or  young 
bachelor,  and  telling  to  him  all  their  impure  and  sinful  thoujfhts,  words 


UOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  205 

«ud  actions.  And  ought  he  then  to  say,  as  if  the  sin  were  committed 
a^dinst  him,  '  I  absolve  thee  T"  This  is  the  climax  of  fdlly  on  the 
part  of  the  peviitent,  and  of  impiety  on  the  part  of  the  priest ! 

There  is  no  ear  but  God's  to  which  our  errors  and  our  faults  ought 
to  be  confessed.  The  secrets  of  all  hearts  are  his ;  and  he  has  gra- 
ciously assured  us  that  he  will  hear  the  acknowledgment  and  peniten- 
tial confessions  of  all  who  approach  him  through  the  one  Mediator.  la 
there  more  condescension  or  mercy  in  a  Roman  priest  than  in  God  T 
No,  my  friends,  there  is  no  ear  more  ready  to  hear  than  his ;  and  he 
only  can  forgive.  To  suppose  the  contrary,  mistakes  wholly  the  chris- 
tian institution,  and  argues  consummate  ignorance  of  God.  It  is  wholly 
incompatible  with  the  genius  of  the  religion,  and  repugnant  to  both  the 
law  and  gospel.  And  with  what  propriety,  modesty,  piety,  males  and 
females,  old  and  young,  should  mutter  their  sins  and  secrets  into  the 
ears  of  any  bachelor,  priest,  or  confessor,  as  if  his  ears  were  a  common 
sewer — or  conduit  to  carry  down  to  oblivion  the  im])urities  of  mortals, 
I  cannot  even  conjecture,  unless  to  give  them  power  over  the  penitents. 
I  opine  that  I  am  yet  in  the  pale  of  logic,  though  I  am  upon  a  very  un- 
pleasant theme. 

The  gentleman  objects  to  some  of  my  reasonings.  He  says  that  the 
church  has  fixed  no  tariff  of  sins  !  Does  he  wish  me  to  tell  the  whole 
story?  Is  not  the  principle  clearly  asserted  in  the  penances  already 
read  ]  Why  fix  a  penance  of  three  days  for  violating  the  sabbath,  and 
twenty  days  for  breaking  a  human  fast?  For  insulting  his  parents  he 
must  do  penance  for  three  years  ;  for  rebelling  against  his  bishop  he 
must  do  penance  all  his  life !  He  who  kills  a  common  man  does 
penance  three  years ;  but  he  who  kills  a  priest  must  do  penance 
twelve  years  ! 

The  gentleman  says  there  is  no  possibility  of  effectual  pardon  from 
a  priest,  unless  contrition  be  sincere.     A  word  from  Ligori  here  : 

"  In  order  to  receive  the  sacrament  ot"  penance  rightly,. perfect  contrition  in 
the  penitent  is  not  required,  but  it  is  sufficient  if  he  have  attrition." — Id.  ib.  N. 
440.  The  saint  proves  this  in  his  exposition  of  the  4th  chapter  of  the  14th  ses- 
sion of  the  council  of  Trent: — Id.  ib.     [Synopsis,  p.  105. 

Will  the  gentleman  explain  what  he  means  by  attrition?  I  have, 
perhaps,  said  enough  on  this  topic  to  prepare  the  way  for  my  speech 
to-morrow  morning  on  the  "sea  serpent!"  But  while  on  the  whole 
premises  of  the  rule  of  faith,  and  the  mutability,  fallibility,  and  tariffs 
of  the  Romanist  sect,  I  beg  to  read,  in  the  words  of  the  most  illustrious 
of  the  champions  of  Protestantism— The  great  Chillingworth: 

"  Know  then,  sir,  that  when  I  say  the  religion  of  Protestants  is  in  prudence  to 
be  preferred  before  yours;  as  on  the  one  side  I  do  not  undtrst&nd  by  your 
religion  the  doctrine  of  Bellarmine  or  Baroniiis,  or  any  other  private  man 
amongst  you,  nor  the  doctrine  of  the  Sorbonne  or  of  the  Jesuits,  ov  of  tht  Domu 
nicans,  or  of  any  o'her  particular  company  among  you;  but  that  wherein  yoa 
all  agree,  or  profess  to  agree,  llie  doctrine  of  the  council  of  TVenl:  So  accor- 
dingly on  the  other  side,  by  the  religion  of  Protestants,  I  do  not  understand  the 
doctrine  of  Lutlier.  or  Calvin,  or  Melancthon,  not  the  confession  of  Arista  or 
Geneva,  ncfr  the  catechism  of  Heidelberg,  nor  the  articles  of  the  church  of 
England,  no,  nor  the  harmony  of  Protestant  confessions;  but  that  wherein  they 
all  agree,  and  which  they  all  subscribe  with  a  greater  harmony,  as  a  perfect  rule 
of  their  faith  and  actions,  that  is  the  Bible. 

"The  BiKLE,  I  say  the  Bible  only  is  the  religion  of  Protestants,  whatsoever 
else  they  believe  besides  it:  And  the  plain,  irrefragable,  and  indubitable  conse- 
quences of  it  well  may  they  hold  as  matter  of  opinion;  but  as  matter  of  faith 
and  religion,  n  '.ither  can  they  with  coherence  to  their  own  grounds  believe  it 
themselves,  nor  require  the  belief  of  it  of  others  without  most  liiirh  and  schis- 

s 


206  DEBATE    ON    THE 

matical  presumption.  I,  for  my  part,  after  a  long  and  (as  I  verily  believe  and 
hope)  impartial  search  of  the  true  way  to  eternal  happiness,  do  profess  plainly 
that  I  cannot  find  any  rest  for  the  sole  of  my  toot   b;it  upon  this  rock  only. 

"  I  see  plainly,  and  with  mine  own  eyes,  that  there  are  popes  against  popes, 
councils  against  councils,  some  fathers  against  others,  the  same  fathers  agamst 
themselves,  a  consent  of  fathers  of  one  age  against  a  consent  o(  fathers  of  another 
•ge,  the  church  of  one  age  against  the  church  of  another  age:  Traditive  inter- 
pretations of  scripture  are  pretended,  but  there  are  few  or  none  to  be  found : 
No  tradition  but  only  of  scripture  can  derive  itself  from  the  fountain,  but  may 
be  plainly  proved  to  be  brought  in,  in  such  an  age  after  Christ,  or  tbat  such  an 
»ge  it  was  not  in.  In  a  word,  there  is  no  sufficient  certainty  but  of  scripture 
only,  for  any  considering  man  to  build  upon.  This,  therefore,  and  this  only  [ 
liave  reason  to  believe:  This  I  will  profess,  according  to  this  I  will  live,  and  for 
this  if  there  be  occasion  I  will  not  only  willingly,  but  even  gladly,  lose  my  life, 
though  I  should  be  sorry  that  christians  should  take  it  from  nie. 

"  Propose  me  any  thing  out  of  this  book,  and  require  whether  I  believe  or  no, 
and  seem  it  never  so  incomprehensible  to  human  reason,  I  will  subscribe  it  with 
hand  and  heart,  as  knowing  no  demonstration  can  be  stronger  than  this,  "  God  hath 
said  so,  therefore  it  Is  true."  In  other  thing^s,  I  will  take  no  man's  liberty  of  judg- 
ing from  him;  neither  shall  any  man  take  mine  from  nie.  I  will  think  no  man 
the  worse  mart,  nor  the  worse  christian,  1  will  love  no  man  the  less  for  difl'ering 
in  opinion  from  me.  And  what  measure  J  mete  to  others,  I  expect  from  them 
again.  I  am  fully  assured  that  God  does  not,  and  therefore  men  ought  not  to 
require  any  more  of  anj'  man  than  this,  to  believe  the  scripture  to  be  God's 
word,  to  endeavor  to  find  the  true  sense  of  it,  and  to  live  according  to  it." — 
[Time  expired.] 

Half  past  3  o'clock^  P.  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

I  am  pursuing  my  opponent,  to-day,  though  various  assertions,  and 
vain  endeavors  to  establish  against  the  Catholic  church,  the  charge  of 
immorality.  I  said,  that  the  grace  of  penance  was,  in  our  estimation, 
so  powerful,  that  there  is  no  sin  which  it  may  not  efface  by  the  mercy 
of  God.  This,  Mr.  C.  says,  is  a  proof  of  our  immorality  !  If  it  be 
immoral  to  lift  a  heart-broken  penitent  from  the  depths  of  despair,  and 
tell  him  there  is  hope  in  God,  my  friend  is  right.  Catholics  believe 
that  there  is  no  sin  which  God  cannot  forgive  to  sorrowing  man.  One 
drop  of  the  infinitely  precious  blood  which  was  shed  for  us  on  Calvary, 
is  more  than  sufficient  to  cancel  the  iniquities  of  a  thousand  worlds  : 
"  If  your  sins  be  as  scarlet,  saith  the  Lord,  they  shall  be  made  as 
white  as  snow."  (Is.  i.  18.)  "  Come  to  me,  all  you  that  labor  and 
are  burdened,"  says  Christ,  "  and  I  will  refresh  you."  (Matt.  xi.  28.) 
"  But,"  we  are  told,  "the  scripture  speaks  of  an  irremissible  sin,  a  sin 
against  the  Holy  Ghost."  That  sin,  my  friends,  is  indeed  a  deadly 
one.  That  sin  is,  obstinately  resisting  the  known  truth,  and  final  im- 
penitence, the  almost  inevitable  consequence  of  suffering  ourselves  to 
be  blinded  by  religious  prejudice.  This  sin  is  more  common  than 
many  (alas  !  too  many)  are  willing  to  believe.  They  are  in  that  way 
oi  which  the  scripture  says  :  "  It  seemeih  to  a  man  right ,-  but  the  ends 
thereof  letid  to  deaths  (Prov.  xvi.  28.)  To  such  Christ  solemnly  de- 
clares that  "  they  shall  call  upon  him,  and  he  will  not  hears  and  they 
shall  die  in  their  si7i."  Such  persons  as  these,  find  it  easier  to  accuse 
our  church  of  a  few  riots  in  Rome,  or  elsewhere,  which  all  the  power 
of  religion  could  not  have  prevented,  (and  the  only  wonder  is  that  they 
did  not  occur  more  frequently,)  than  to  study  her  divine  evidences,  be- 
lieve the  mysterious  truths  she  proposes,  and  practise  the  holy  lessons 
she  enjoins.  But  I  must  hasten  to  answer  the  multitude  of  heteroge- 
neous questions  which  my  friend  has  proposed. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    HELIGION.  207 

•*  What  gives  general  councils  their  infallibility  1"  The  power  and 
omniscience  of  God  :  the  Holy  Ghost  abiding  with  the  church,  all 
days,  until  the  consummation  of  the  world. — "  Can  a  thousand  falli- 
bles  make  one  infallible?"  Yes;  and,  according  to  your  own  show 
ing,  every  one  of  twelve  fallibles  made  an  infallible;  for  you  allowed 
that  the  twelve  apostles  were,  individually,  and  of  course,  coUectivelj, 
infallible.  And,  if  you  need  more  homely  illustrations,  does  it  follow, 
that  because  one  thread  cannot  keep  a  seventy-four  to  her  moorings, 
that  a  cable  consisting  of  a  thousand  strong  threads  cannot  do  so  1 
What  one  cannot  do,  many  can,  humanly  speaking:  how  much  more 
60  when  there  is  a  divine  promise  :  "  Behold  I  am  with  you  all  days  t 
the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  yo«r"  (Mark  xvi.  18.)  I  never 
said  the  Jansenists  were  Roman  Catholics.  I  objected  to  Du  Pin  from 
the  very  commencement  of  this  controversy,  on  the  ground  of  his  be- 
ing a  Jansenist.  The  Jansenists  have  been  condemned  by  the  popes. 
Hehce,  they  lose  no  opportunity  of  insulting  them,  exaggerating 
their  faults  and  suppressing  their  virtues.  My  friend,  then,  followed 
a  notoriously  treacherous  guide,  when  he  trusted  himself,  and  his 
cargo  of  notions  about  the  popes,  to  such  a  helmsman  as  Du  Pin.  But, 
bad  as  the  Jansenists  are,  they  are  too  learned  in  church  history  and 
in  the  scriptures,  to  become  members  of  any  Protestant  sect.  Their 
magnificent  work.  The  Perpetuity  of  the  Catholic  Faith,  is,  probably, 
the  most  learned  production  recorded  in  the  annals  of  religious  contro- 
versy. I  should  be  happy  to  lend  it  to  any  gentleman  of  this  assem- 
bly, and  thereby  convince  him  how  venerable  are  the  doctrines,  which 
want  of  knowledge  induces  some  persons  to  assail.  The  opinions  of 
all  the  bishops  in  the  world,  are  no  article  of  faith.  Articles  of  faith 
are  defined,  and  they  are  no  longer  opinions.  "  Siquis  dixerit ;"  "  If 
any  say  :"  in  this  manner  commence  the  canons  of  doctrine  to  define 
articles  of  faith  ;  and  they  end  by  the  words,  "Anathema  sit ;"  in  imi- 
tation of  St.  Paul,  who  said  :  "  Were  I,  or  an  angel  from  heaven,  to 
preach  to  you  any  other  gospel  than  what  has  been  preached,  let  him 
be  anathema."  This  formula  always  marks  the  definitions  of  Catho- 
lic faith,  among  the  acts  of  general  councils.  But  it  will  make  even 
the  smatterers  in  theology,  the  sciolists,  I  could  have  almost  said,  the 
school-boys  of  Europe,  laugh,  to  see  the  gentleman  gravely  quote  Fra 
Paolo,  or  Father  Paul,  the  sycophant  of  the  senate  of  Venice,  the  ex- 
communicated monk,  or,  to  say  all  in  two  words,  the  "  Caicinistic 
heretic,''''  as  he  is  justly  called  by  the  Protestant  bishop,  Burnet,  as 
his  authority  for  the  proceedings  of  the  bishops  in  the  council  of  Trent. 
"  He  hid,"  says  Bossuet,  "the  spirit  of  Luther  under  the  frock  of  a 
monk."  Henry  IV.  of  France  detected  his  hypocrisy,  and  denounced 
him  to  the  senate  of  Venice ;  and  Pallavicini  convicted  him  of  three 
hundred  and  sixty  errors  in  his  pretended  history  of  the  coimcil  of 
Trent.  I  have  got  Paolo  Sarpis'  book  in  English,  and  will  prove  on 
him  some,  at  least,  of  these  errors,  if  he  is  quoted  again,  with  his  worthy 
compeers.  Smith  and  Du  Pin!  Now  the  truth  is,  that  there  were  upwards 
of  two  hundred  and  fifty  bishops,  or  prelates,  of  different  nations, 
nearly  two  hundred  of  the  most  learned  theologians,  and  the  ambassa- 
dors of  many  Catholic  princes,  at  this  council.  It  was  held  in  Trent,  a 
free  city,  and  the  utmost  liberty  was  allowed  in  the  discussion  of  the  dif- 
ferent questions, previously  to  the  definitions  of  faith.  The  council  met 
Uj  decide  anew,  what  had  been  always,  every  where,  and  by  all  believed, 


208  *  DKBATE    OK    THE 

in  the  Catholic  church  ;  and  the  canon  of  scripture  which  it  defined,  waa 
no  other  than  what  had  heen  settled  in  all  the  previous  councils  for 
upwards  of  a  thousand  years;  and  this  the  whole  Catholic  world  per- 
fectly understood.  What,  now,  becomes  of  the  gentleman's  48  by  25? 
Why  does  he  exaggerate  in  figures  when  he  talks  against  Catholics, 
and  j^gurc  in  miniature  when  he  speaks  for  them  1  Those  beardless 
youths  he  speaks  of,  had,  I  presume  from  Italian  faceg  generally,  as 
much  of  that  excrescence  as  other  animals  distinguished  by  a  late 
senator.  My  friend  was  quite  tender  to-day,  indeed  excessively  elo- 
quent, on  the  subject  of  marriage.  Had  he  confined  himself  to  its  just 
praise,  as  the  primeval  institution  of  God,  on  the  flowerjt banks  of 
Eden,  without  outraging  the  express  declarations  of  Christ,  and  the 
inspiration  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  new  law,  I  would  have  repeated 
what  I  have  already  said,  in  acknowledgment  of  the  purity  and  sanc- 
tity of  the  nuptial  union.  But,  I  must  borrow  his  own  words,  to  say, 
with  still  more  truth,  that  "  I  blushed  for  our  audience,  and  *'as 
shocked  by  the  freedom  of  his  attack  upon  the  ordinance  of  God." 
The  gentleman  may  talk  until  the  end  of  the  year,  and  I  would  meet 
him  at  every  pause  with  the  words  of  Christ,  Matt.  xix.  12;  or,  if 
these  are  not  plain  enough  to  the  "  sensual  man  who  thinkeih  this 
virtue  foolishness,"  with  those  of  St.  Paul,  (1  Cor.  vii.)  "/  would 
that  all  men  were  even  as  myself."  "  /  say  to  the  unmarried  and  the 
widows,  it  is  good  for  them  if  they  so  continue,  even  as  /."  (ver.  8.)  "  He 
thai  is  with  a  wife,  is  solicitous  for  the  things  of  the  world,  how  hf. 
may  please  his  wife ;  and  he  is  divided.  He  that  is  without  a  wife,  is 
solicitous  for  the  things  that  belong  to  the  Lord,  how  he  may  please  God. 
(verses  32,  33.)  "  ^rt  thou  loosed  from  a  wife,  seek  not  a  wife  •  .  .  if 
a  virgin  marry,  she  hath  not  sinned .-  nevertheless,  such  shall  have  tribu- 
lation of  the  flesh.  But  I  spare  you."  (ver.  28.)  Can  holy  writ  more 
unequivocally  reprobate  all  the  gentleman's  romancing  about  wedlock, 
to  the  proscription  of  that  pure  devotedness  to  the  holy  offices  of  the 
ministry,  of  which  Jesus  Christ,  St.  John,  and  St.  Paul,  have  left  us 
the  brightest  examples  in  their  own  persons  1  Mr.  C.  said  :  "  Dared  1 
to  tell,  before  this  assembly,  but  half  that  1  have  learned  of  that  virgin 
priesthood  :"  and  I,  my  friends,  dared  I  tell,  before  this  assembly,  but 
half  that  I  have  learned,  from  old  Protestant  residenters  of  this  city, 
of  that  married  priesthood,  in  Elyria,  on  Lake  Erie,  and  in  towns  in 
the  interior  of  this  state,  without  casting  the  net  over  heads  nearer 
home,  I  would  fill  your  souls  with  tenfold  horror  !  I  would  advise 
my  friend  to  tread  lightly  on  these  ashes.  Holy  as  marriage  is,  and 
holy  as  I  confess  it  to  be,  St.  Paul  advises  married  people  to  forego, 
at  certain  times,  the  privileges  of  that  state,  to  give  themseices  to  prayer. 
(ver.  5.)  The  same  is  commanded  in  the  prophet  Joel,  xi.  16. 
The  high-priest  was  forbidden,  in  Leviticus,  to  neglect  the  foregoing 
injunctions,  when  he  ministered  unto  the  Lord  ;  as,  also,  to  take  a* 
widow  to  wife,  but  only  a  virgin.  Now,  a  widow,  according  to  my 
friend's  notion,  would  have  a  better  title  than  a  virgin  to  have  a  high- 
priest  for  her  husband,  inasmuch  as  she  had  shown  her  reverence  for 
the  insti'^ition  of  marriage,  by  a  previous  union.  And,  now.  let  me 
ask  again,  why  did  my  opponent  labor  so  hard  to  give  his  Protestant 
hearers,  the  Paulicians  for  their  ancestors,  when  it  is  well  known, 
that  these  heretics  condemned  marriage?  This,  the  Catholic  church 
has  not  done.     But,  when  a  vow  is  made  to  God,  she  says,  with  St. 


R0MA3V    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  209 

Paul,  (1  Tim.  v.  12.)  "  ii  Ls  damnable,  in  either  man  or  woman,  to 
break  it."  Has  my  opponent  read  all  these  texts  1  Does  he  not  re- 
member to  have  read  in  history,  the  honor  in  which  the  light  of  reason 
taught  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  to  hold  virginity,  and  the  privileges 
to  which  it  was  every  where  entitled  ]  Has  he  read  of  scandalous 
damages  recovered  in  courts,  in  England,  by  Reverends,  who  were 
mocked  to  scorn  the  following  Sundaj',  when  they  went  into  the  pul- 
pit to  preach  1  Has  he  read  of  other  reverends,  who  have  had  to  pay 
damages  for  the  slanderous  reports,  put  in  circulation  by  their  fair 
companions  in  weal  and  woe  1  Is  this  the  tribulation  according  to  the 
flesh,  of  which  St.  Paul  speaks  1  "The  decrees  of  councils  attest  that 
priests  have  not  been  such  immaculate  purities."  Well ;  and  what 
do  these  records  of  the  civil  courts  of  England,  and  the  domestic  an- 
nals of  broken  hearts  and  blighted  honor,  attest  1  As  well  might  the 
gentleman  charge  marriage  <vith  the  shocking  excesses,  which  it  did 
not  prevent  in  David  and  Solomon,  as  the  law  of  celibacy  with  the 
specks  and  blemishes  of  the  Catholic  priesthood. 

In  every  religion  there  will  be  bad  men,  and  by  them  every  virtue 
will  be  outraged,  but  must  we  on  this  account  blame  virtue  and  ex- 
punge it;  must  we,  like  Moses  descending  from  Sinai,  break  the 
tables  of  the  law,  because  of  a  stiff-necked  and  a  revolted  people ;  or, 
on  the  contrary,  hold  up  that  law  before  them  in  terror,  remind  them 
of  their  duty,  and  reclaim  them,  by  exhibitions  of  divine  justice  and 
mercy,  to  virtue  ]  "  It  is  essential  for  a  bishop  to  be  a  married  man." 
And  the  gentleman's  vote  would  be  withheld  from  me,  because  I  am 
a  bachelor.  Why,  sir,  St.  Paul  does  not  mean  that  a  bishop  should  be 
a  man  of  one  wife,  but  that  he  should  have  had  but  one — otherwise,  as 
he  was  himself  unmarried,  he  would  have  acted  against  his  own  rules. 
Now  I  claim  to  be  as  clear-sighted,  and  as  well  read  in  the  bible,  as 
my  friend,  and  I  maintain  it  is  essential  a  bishop  should  not  be  a  mar- 
ried man;  for  he  will  not  then  be  afraid  to  bring  home  from  the  bed  of 
death  the  small-pox,  the  cholera,  or  the  plague,  to  his  wife  and  chil- 
dren ;  he  will  not  be  prevented  by  the  engrossing  care  of  a  family 
from  visiting  the  "  widow  and  the  orphan ;"  he  will  have  more  money 
to  spare  for  the  wants  of  the  poor.  "To  preside  over  a  christian  con- 
gregation," says  Mr.  Campbell,  "  a  bishop  should  know  experimen- 
tally the  domestic  affections  and  relations ;  he  should  st-ady  human 
nature  in  the  bosom  of  his  family ;  there  is  a  class  of  feelings  which 
no  gentleman  of  single  life  can  comprehend,  or  in  which  he  can  sym- 
pathise, and  these  are  essential  to  that  intimacy  (what  intimacy  !)  with 
all  classes,  sexes  and  duties,  which  his  relations  to  the  church  often  im- 
pose upon  him."  What  does  all  this  mean  T  I  am  sincerely  shocked 
at  this  freedom.  But  if  it  mean  any  thing  that  I  should  answer,  it 
would  mean,  that  a  bishop  should  be  a  bachelor  to  sympathise  with  a 
numerous  class  of  christians,  vix.  old  maids ;  he  should  have  a  scold' 
ing  wife  to  be  able  to  sympathise  with  a  scolded  husband;  a  sickly 
wife,  an  ugly  wife,  a  drinking  wife,  an  arbitrary  wife,  an  ignorant, 
stupid  wife,  to  know  experimentally  what  husbands  suffer  in  all  these 
domestic  relations ;  he  should,  and  he  should  not,  have  children.  Can 
there  be  any  thing  more  superlatively  ridiculous !  As  well  might  you 
exact  of  the  physician,  that  he  should  have  had  all  the  diseases  you 
may  call  upon  him  to  cure.  A  bishop  can  study  his  own  heart,  and 
lis  Cicero  says,  "Timeo  h  jminem  unius  libri ;"  if  he  will  not  learn 
s2  14 


210  DEBATE    ON    THE 

human  natcre  there,  he  will  not  learn  it  any  where.  I  have  much  more 
to  say  on  this  subject,  which  queen  Elizabeth,  Oxford  college,  (Eng- 
land,) regulations  to  the  "  fellows,"  and  Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton, 
furnished  me  ;  but  whether  I  resume  this  unpleasant  task  or  not,  de-  , 
pends  on  my  learned  opponent.  I  have  a  large  family  to  provide  for, 
and  I  try  at  least  to  take  care  of  it.  Fifty  little  orphans,  in  want  of 
an  asylum,  look  to  me  for  bread !  and  as  Christ  and  St.  Paul  have 
taught  me  to  live,  while  I  have  ears  to  hear,  and  a  heart  to  commiser- 
ate the  hard  lotofthe  fatherless  and  motherless,  and  claims  to  present 
in  iheii  name  to  a  generous  public,  so,  must  I  reason  and  judge,  I  should 
continue  to  live.  These  little  beneficiaries  gather  around  me  when  I 
visit  them,  and  they  call  me  by  the  endearing  name  of  father !  and 
their  appealing  looks,  their  grateful  smiles,  their  wants  and  artless- 
ness  and  joy  excite  in  me  emotions  which  a  virtuous  parent  well 
might  share,  and  an  unfeeling  one,  who  neglects  or  abuses  his  chil- 
dren, well  might  envy  !  I  invite  my  friend  to  visit  these  little  inter- 
esting orphans,  and  see  how  an  old  bachelor  gets  along  arhong  them. 

Did  I  really  defend  white  lies]  I  think  not.  "  One  sin,  in  the 
sight  of  heaven  is  as  great  as  another."  This  I  deny.  This  doctrino 
saps  the  foundation  of  sound  morals ;  it  leaves  us  no  energy  for  virtu 
ous  effort ;  it  writes  the  mysterious  "  iVIane,  Tecel,  Phares,"  on  the 
wall,  for  the  first  and  least  offence ;  it  has  no  warrant  in  scripture.  Gml 
often  speaks  of  nations  filling  up  the  measure  of  their  guilt,  and  what 
could  this  mean,  if  one  sin  were  as  bad  in  divine  estimation,  and  filled 
up  as  much  space  as  a  thousand  ]  It  is  true.  He  punishes  all  sins, 
but  not  alike ;  therefore  all  are  not  equally  heinous  in  his  sight.  Mr.  C. 
says,  "  I  wish  the  gentleman  would  enable  me  to  deliver  myself,"  &c. 
You  may  deliver  yourself  on  any  point  you  please,  I  have  no  objection. 

His  next  attempt  at  proof  of  immorality,  was  the  allegation  that  we 
have  destroyed  the  second  commandment,  rejecting  the  law  against 
making  graven  images,  that  we  may  worship  creatures,  and  images 
of  creatures,  and  introdace  idolatry !  the  invocation  of  the  spirits  of 
dead  men  and  women,  &c.  &c.  My  friends,  this  charge  of  leaving 
out  the  second  commandment  is  very  stale,  and,  no  doubt,  my  Protes- 
tant hearers  will  be  astonished  to  see  and  hear  for  themselves  that  it 
is  utterly  unfounded.  Here  is  the  Catholic  catechism  of  this  diocese  : 
it  thus  reads.  2.  "  Which  is  the  first  commandment?"  Ans.  "  I  am 
the  Lord  thy  God,  who  brought  thee  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  out 
of  the  house  of  bondage.  Thou  shall  not  have  strange  gods  before  me. 
Thou  shall  not  make  to  thyself  a  graven  thing,  nor  the  likeness  of  any 
thing,  that  is  in  the  heavens  above  or  the  earth  beneath,  or  in  the  waters 
under  the  earth  .•  thou  shall  not  adore  them  nor  serve  them.''''  The  Douay 
catechism  is  equally  full,  (holds  it  open,)  so  are  all  our  bibles.  I 
will  display  this  little  catechism  here,  or  I  am  willing  to  pitch  it 
among  my  audience  for  inspection.  They  will  see  that  it  contains 
the  commandment  in  full,  and  that  there  is  nothing  in  it,  in  violation 
of  the  law  of  God,  on  this,  or  on  any  other  subject.  It  is  an  admirable 
abridgment  of  faith  and  morals.  If  there  have  been  any  catechisms 
published  without  the  commandments  in  full,  it  is  because  they  were* 
published  for  the  use  of  children,  whose  memories  were  not  to  be  en- 
cumbered by  too  long  answers,  when  the  sense  and  substance  of  the 
precept  could  be  sufficiently  expressed  in  fewer  words.  As  to  the 
division  of  the  commandments,  my  friend  knows  that  the  bible  was 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  211 

not  originally  divided  into  chapters  and  verses  as  it  is  at  present. 
But  with  this  question  we  are  not  now  concerned. 

It  is  not  a  crime  to  make  an  image,  if  we  do  not  adore  and  worship 
it  instead  of  the  Creator,  who  is  blessed  for  ever ;  otherwise  God  would 
have  transgressed  his  own  prohibition,  for  he  commanded  Moses  to 
make  a  graven  image,  namely,  the  image  of  a  brazen  serpent,  and  to 
set  it  up  before  a  people  exceedingly  prone  to  idolatry,  that  they  may 
look  on  it  and  be  cured  of  the  bites  of  the  fiery  serpents  that  stung  them 
for  their  murmurings  in  the  wilderness.  The  divine  lawgiver  also 
directed  (Exodus  xxv.)  two  images  of  Cherubim  to  be  made,  with 
their  wings  overshadowing  the  mercy  seat  of  the  ark  of  the  cov- 
enant, toivards  which  the  people  turned  in  prayer,  and  before  which 
Joshua  and  the  ancients  of  Israel  fell  flat  upon  their  faces  until  the 
evening,  ai  Hai,  when  they  were  defeated,  for  the  sin  of  Achan,  by  the 
men  of  that  city ;  and  Joshua  said,  "  Alas,  O  Lord  God,"  &c.  vii.  7. 
What  was  the  temple  of  Solomon,  built  by  the  special  directions  of 
that  God  who  had  forbidden  the  making  of  graven  images  to  adore 
and  serve  them,  but  a  temple  of  images  ?  Never  has  any  house,  per- 
haps, since  or  before,  not  excepting  the  celebrated  picture  galleries  of 
the  Louvre,  abounded  more  in  pictures  and  likenesses  of  things  in 
heaven  and  things  on  earth,  than  did  that  venerable  pile,  and  yet  God 
was  not  offended,  but  promised  that  his  ears  should  be  attentive  to  the 
prayer  of  him  that  prayed  in  that  place,  as  we  read  in  the  book  of  Kings. 
The  objection  is  unphilosophical,  as  well  as  unscriptural.  What,  I 
ask,  are  the  letters  G.  O.  D.  but  pictures,  representing  a  certain  ideal 
So  written  language,  when  first  used,  was  a  series  of  pictures,  as  every 
scholar  knows ;  and  the  bible  abounds,  like  the  temple,  with  these  pic- 
torial signs.  Again,  where  is  the  immorality  of  looking  on  the  em- 
blem of  our  dying  Savior  ]  Is  it  not  the  gospel  narrative  of  his  sorrows 
and  his  love,  condensed  ?  The  council  of  Trent,  Sess.  xxv.  teaches, 
what  every  Catholic  knows,  "  that  while  we  venerate  the  memorials 
of  Christ  and  his  saints,  we  are  not  to  believe  that  any  divinity  or 
power  resides  in  them."  I  would,  therefore,  express  in  a  few  words, 
the  motive  of  our  respect  for  tlie  crucifix,  and  our  sense  of  its  lifeless- 
ness  and  want  of  power,  in  the  following  apostrophe :  "  Thou  canst 
not  see,  thou  canst  not  hear,  thou  canst  not  help  me,  but  thou  remind- 
est  me  of  my  God." 

Were  the  objection  of  my  worthy  opponent  rigorously  urged,  it 
would  be  impiety  for  the  orphan  girl  to  wear  around  her  neck  the  like- 
ness of  a  fond,  but  alas  !  prematurely  deceased  mother :  or  a  soldier 
boy  the  miniature  of  the  father  of  his  country.  The  different  trades  and 
professions  should  be  arraigned  for  the  idolatrous  practice  of  suspend- 
ing before  their  doors  the  signs  of  their  various  occupations.  The 
United  States'  mint  would  be  a  factory  of  idols,  and  every  money- 
holder,  in  bank  notes,  or  the  hard  metal,  an  idolater!  Finally,  if  the 
Catholics  substitute  the  words  "honor  and  veneration  "  for  "wor- 
ship," when  speaking  of  the  relative  respect  paid  to  the  emblems  of 
Christ  and  his  saints,  yet  even  the  use  of  this  word  could  be  defend- 
ed from  the  Bible,Chron.  last  ch.  where  the  people,  as  it  reads  in  the 
Protestant  bible,  worshiped  the  Ijord  and  the  King,  but  surely  not  with 
the  same  kind  of  worship.  The  exterior  act  appeared  the  same,  but 
in  the  heart,  there  was  distinction  of  homage.  If  it  be  wrong  and  ai: 
outrage  to  the  mediation  of  Christ  to  seek  inferior  intercessors  with 
God,  why  did  Paul  ask  the  prayers  of  the  christians  to  whom  he  ad- 


212  DEBATE    ON    THE 

dressed  h'.s  epistles  ?  Why  did  God  command  the  importunate  friends 
of  Job  to  ask  the  just  man's  prayers  for  them  1  Why  did  he  appoint 
a  priest  to  offer  gifts  and  sacrifices  for  sin  ?  And  why  did  the  apos- 
tles teach  us  to  say,  "  I  believe  in  the  communion  of  saints."  //  was 
strange,  said  king  Jamen,  to  the  Scotch  bishops,  to  allow  those  honorable 
places  in  the  churches,  to  unicorns,  lions,  and  devils,  f  griffins  J  which 
were  refused  to  prophets  and  apostles !  "  Let  them  not  lead  people  by  the 
nose,"  says  Dr.  Herbert  Thorndike,  Prebendary  of  Westminster,  "  to  be- 
lieve they  can  prove  their  supposition  that  the  pope  is  anti-christ,  and  the 
papists  idolaters,  when  they  can  not."  Just  Weights  and  Measures, 
.11.  "  It  is  a  shame  to  charge  men  with  what  they  are  not  guilty 
of,  in  order  to  make  the  breach  wider,  already  too  wide."  Dr.  Mon- 
tague, Prot.  bishop  of  Norwich,  Inv.  of  Saints,  p.  60. 

Another  proof  of  immorality  is  the  distinction  between  material  and 
formal  sins  !  This  is  a  just  distinction.  The  civil  law  recognizes  it. 
An  injury  done  with  malice  aforethought,  or  formally,  is  very  different, 
as  to  the  guilt  of  the  agent,  from  accidental  and  unintentional  injury. 
A  child,  a  maniac,  a  man  in  his  sleep,  or  otherwise  unconscious  of 
what  he  does,  and  not  the  culpable  cause  of  that  want  of  conscious- 
ness, may  inflict  an  injury,  with  impunity,  for  which  liberty,  and  life 
should,  under  different  circumstances,  be  very  justly  forfeited.  My 
friend  has  brought  up  casuistry.  The  tendency  of  such  punishments 
is  salutary :  and  if  a  severer  penalty  is  inflicted  for  the  murder  of  e 
priest,  &c.,  it  is  to  preserve  the  inviolability  of  religion,  which  watches 
over  the  rights  of  parents,  to  the  fear  and  love  of  their  children,  and 
of  the  law,  to  the  obedience  and  respect  of  those  for  whose  preserva- 
tion and  wellbeing  it  was  enacted.  My  learned  friend  traduced  the 
clergy  of  the  Catholic  church  and  described  the  dangers  of  the  con- 
fessional. As  well  might  he  denounce  the  medical  profession.  He 
read  numerous  extracts  from  publications  of  Smith,  Slocum  &  Go's 
joint-stock  concern,  for  the  defamation  of  innocence.  He  may  sit 
down,  in  the  lowest  places,  with  these  worthy  associates,  if  he  will.  I 
shall  not  molest  them  in  their  calculations  of  the  ^^ pieces  of  silver." 
"  I  will  leave  them  alone  in  their  glory." 

The  gentleman  allows  that  auricular  confession  was  the  law  of  the 
church  in  the  fifth  century.  This  is  generous,  and  he  is  contradicted 
in  the  concession,  by  some  Protestants,  who,  for  want  of  better  knowl- 
edge, give  the  institution  a  later  date.  It  remounts,  however,  farther 
up  the  chain  of  holy  usages,  viz.  to  the  time  of  Christ,  who  gave 
such  power  to  men  as  that  expressed  in  the  text,  St.  John,  xx.  22,  23. 
This  power  was  not  to  be  exercised  without  a  knowledge  of  the  dis- 
positions of  the  sinner,  and  this  knowledge  could  only  be  obtained 
from  his  own  confession.  Leo  I.  did  not,  therefore;  •'  open  the 
floodgates  of  impiety  by  substituting  private  for  public  confession." 
The  practice  is  of  divine  institution,  and  how  horrid  is  it  not,  to  speak 
thus  of  what  all  ages  and  nations  of  Christianity,  the  Greek  and  the 
■  Latin  churches  and  the  sects  of  the  east,  have  ever  held  as  the  work 
of  Christ,  taught  by  himself  and  every  where  preached  by  his  apos- 
tles !  Tertullian  and  Origen,  who  lived  in  the  age  next  to  the  apos- 
tles, hold  the  following  language  :  "  If  you  withdraw  from  confession, 
think  of  hellfire,  which  c^mf  ssion  extinguishes.^^  '•'■Look  carefully  iibout 
thee  in  choosing  the  person  to  whom  you  confess — confess  to  him  your  tnosi 
ftecret  sins."  "  //  is  necessary,"  says  St.  Basil,  in  the  4th  century,  "  to  con- 
fess Ota-  sins  to  those  to  whom  the  dispensation  of  the  divine  mysteries  i» 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGION.  213 

eommitted.^^  "  Let  no  one,^^  $ays  St.  Augustine,  "  soy  to  himself:  '  Ido 
penance  to  God,  in  private.^  Is  it  then  in  vain  that  Christ  has  said,  what- 
soever  you  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven  ?  Is  it  in  vain  that 
the  keys  have  been  given  to  the  church?''''  These  texts  abundantly 
prove  that  auricular  confession  was  practised  before  the  time  of  Leo  1. 
in  the  fifth  century,  and  consequently  that  Christ  and  his  apostles 
must  share  the  odium  in  which  my  opponent  presumes  to  involve  the 
Catholic  church.  He  says  the  practice  of  the  public  confession  of  sin, 
before  the  whole  congregation,  was  the  last  entrenchment  against  the 
rapid  declension  of*  morals  in  the  fifth  century.  And  yet  with  glaring 
inconsistency,  after  contending  for  the  practice  so  vehemently,  in 
almost  the  same  breath,  he  tells  us :  "  There  is  no  ear  but  God's,  to 
which  our  errors  or  our  faults  ought  to  be  confessed,  for  that  the 
secrets  of  all  hearts  are  his."  Can  there  be  contradiction  more  palpa- 
ble ?  And  does  not  the  Catholic  practice  save  the  sinner's  honor,  gently 
M"ithdraw  him  from  the  downward  path  to  ruin,  admonish  him  of  his 
ingratitude  and  restore  him  to  religion  and  to  society  a  bdtter  man, 
in  all  probability  to  sin  no  morel  "Is  there  more  condescension  or 
mercy  in  a  Roman  prieSt,"  asks  my  opponent,  "  than  in  God  V  Why, 
the  blasphemous  question  might  have  been  put  to  Christ  by  the  leper, 
when  the  Savior  ordered  him  "  to  goshoiv  himself  to  the  priest."  Matth. 
viii.  4.  "  Is  there  more  condescension,  or  mercy,  in  a  Jetvish priest  than 
in  God?'' 

My  friend .  quotes  St.  James,  "  confess  your  sins  to  one  another  :" 
but  he  takes  care  to  omit  the  antecedents  and  the  consequents  of  the  text. 
"  Is  any  man  sick  among  you.  Let  him  bring  in  the  priests  of  the 
church,  and  let  them  pray  over  him,  anointing  him  with  oil  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord,  and  the  prayer  of  faith  shall  save  the  sick  man,  and  if  he  be 
in  Mtns,  they  shall  be  forgiven  him.'"  James  v.  14.  Is  not  obedience 
to  the  directions  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  calling  in  of  the  priests  wnd 
availing  himself  of  their  ministry,  the  indispensable  condition  prescri' 
bed  by  God  himself,  in  the  scripture,  for  the  cure  of  the  corporal  mal- 
adies, but,  much  more,  of  the  sms  of  the  sick  man  ?  Could  my 
friend  have  been  more  effectually  refuted  than  he  evidently  is  by 
a  text  of  his  own  selection  ?     [Time  expired.] 

Four  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

From  the  beginning  I  have  said,  and  I  repeated  it  yesterday,  that 
1  would  not  state  any  fact  which  I  could  not  sustain.  I  do  not  care 
how  often  I  am  put  to  the  test.  I  have  here  three  catechisms,  in 
which  the  second  commandment  is  omitted,  and  to  keep  up  the  number 
ten,  they  have  made  two  out  of  the  10th.  Here  are  two  catechisms, 
published  by  the  authority  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church.  The  title 
of  one,  from  the  highest  authority  since  the  council  of  Trent,  is  as 
follows : — 

"  The  most  Rev.  Dr.  James  Butler's  catechism:  revised,  enlarged,  approved, 
and  recommended  by  four  Roman  Catholic  Archbishops  of  Ireland,  as  a  general 
catechism  for  the  kingdom.  Suffer  little  children  to  come  to  me,  and  iurbid 
them  not,  for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God.  Mark  x.  14.  This  is  eterna  life, 
that  they  might  know  thee,  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ,  whom  thou 
hast  sent.  John,  xviii.  3.  Twelfth  edition:  carefully  corrected  and  improved, 
with  amendments.  Dublin:  Printed  by  Kichard  Coyne,  4.  Capel  st.  Bookseller 
and  Printer  to  the  R.  C.  College  of  St.'  Patrick  and  \laynooth,  and  publisher  to 
the  Catholic  Bishops  of  Ireland.  1826."     [See  page  36. 


214  DEBATE   OTf   THU 

Q.  "  Say  the  commandments  of  God. 

A.  1.  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God;  thou  shalt  have  no  strange  gods  before  Rie. 
2.  Thou  shalt  not  take  ihe  name  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain. 
9.  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor's  wife. 
10.  Thou  shalt  not  rovet  thy  neighbor's  goods,     Exod.  xx." 

Are  these  the  ten  commandments  of  Godi,  as  all  Roman  Catholio 
children  are  taught !! 

The  single  fact  that  the  four  archbishops  of  Ireland,  and  the  Rom- 
an Catholic  college  of  Maynooth  should  have  impiously  dared  to 
strike  one  commandment  from  the  ten,  which  God  wrote  on  two  tables 
with  his  own  finger,  and  should  have  changed  and  divided  the  tenth 
nto  two,  speaks  volumes  in  proof  of  my  allegataagainst  the  Romanist 
>ule  of  faith.     But  we  shall  hear  another  witness — Title: 

"  The  General  Catechism  reviscil,  corrected  and  enlarged  by  the  Right  Rev- 
erend James  Doyle  D.  D.  Bp.  &c.  and  prescribed  by  him  to  be  taught  through- 
out the  diocese  of  Kildaire  and  Lerghlin.  [Motto  the  same  as  in  the  other,  ster- 
eotyped and  printed  at  Dublin  by  the  same  printer,  A.  D.  1827.]     See.  p.  25. 

Q.  Say  the  ten  commandments  of  God.  ' 

A.  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God;  thou  shalt  not  have  any  strange  gods  before  me. 
Thou  shalt  not  make  to  thyself  neither  an  idol  or  any  figure  to  adore  it. 

2.  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thj»'God  in  vain;  for  the  Lord 
will  not  hold  him  guiltless  that  shall  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  his  God  in  vain. 

9.  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor's  wife. 

10.  Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor's  goods." 

This  merits  the  reprobation  pronounced  on  the  preceding. 

Again  :  here  is  an  American  catechism. — Yes,  in  this  land  ot 
bibles  has  been  published  a  catechism,  in  which  the  same  liberty  is 
taken.     Its  title  is  : 

"  An  abridgement  of  the  Christian  doctrine,  with  proofs  of  scripture 
on  points  controverted,  by  way  of  question  and  answer  :  composed  in 
1649  by  Rev.  Henry  Tuberville,  D.  D.  of  the  English  college  of 
Douay  :  Now  approved  and  recommended  for  his  diocese,  by  the  right 
Rev.  Benedict  bishop  of  Boston.  This  is  the  way,  walk  ye  in  it." 
Isa.  XXX.  21.  New  York;  published  by  John  Doyle;  No.  12.  Liber- 
ty street,  stereotyped  by  A.Chandler.  1833."  See  p.  54. 

"  Q.   What  is  the  secon^i  coniniandinent  ? 

A.  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain." 

Is  this  the  second  commandment?  It  is  not.  That  child  is  taughl 
falsehood,  which  is  taught  thus  to  learn  the  decalogue,  If  the  Roman 
bishops  and  archbishops  in  Ireland  and  America,  in  this  our  day  can 
thus  impose  on  all  the  youth  in  the  Roman  communion,  and  thus  per- 
vert and  annul  one  of  God's  commandments,  to  make  way  for  the 
■worshipiflg  of  images,  what  shall  we  say  of  the  morality  of  her  rule 
of  faith  in  this  and  other  matters  1 

It  is  a  poor  apology  for  this  expurgation  of  the  decalogue,  that  it  is 
not  so  done  in  the  Douay  bible  :  for  when  these  catechisms  were  in- 
troduced, and  even  yet  in  most  Catholic  countries,  not  one  layman  in  a 
thousand  ever  read  that  bible :  the  catechism  intended  for  universal 
consumption  contained  all  his  knowledge  of  God's  law.  What  my- 
riads, then,  through  this  fraud,  must  have  lived  and  died  in  thw  be- 
lief that  the  second  commandment  was  no  part  of  God's  law  !  It 
is  clearly  proved,  that  the  pastors  of  the  church  have  struck  out  one 
of  God's  ten  words;  which  not  only  in  the  Old  Testament,  but  in  all 
revelation,  are  the  most  emphatically  regarded  as  tlie  synopsis  of  ali 
religion  and  morality.  They  haVe  also  made  a  ninth  commandment 
,  out  of  the  tenth,  and  their  ninth,  in  tnat  independent  position,  bo- 


HOMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGIO^V.  215 

eomes  identical  with  the  seventh  commandment,  and  makes  God  use 
a  tautology  in  the  only  instrument  in  the  univetse  that  he  wrote  with 
his  own  hand  !  But  why  this  annulling  of  the  second  commandment  t 
Because  it  is  a  positive  prohibition  of  the  practice  of  bowing  down 
to  images,  and  doing  them  homage;  a  custom  dearer  to  the  Romish 
church  than  both  the  second  and  the  seventh  commandment !  It  is, 
hfwever,  gross  idolatry.  So  far  at  least  as  the  ignorant  and  unedu- 
cated part  of  the  community  is  concerned  ;  no  spiritual,  no  highly 
cultivated  mind  needs  such  aids  of  worship — nay,  they  would,  to 
such  persons,  be  hindrances  rather  than  aids  of  devotion.  But  the 
uneducated  and  sensual  mass,  which  are  in  that  community, — the  vast 
majority,  literally  adore  the  image,  and  delight >n  the  picture  more 
than  in  the  Creator.  And,  therefore,  the  abrogation  of  the  second 
commandment,  by  the  priests,  is  the  positive  introduction  of  idolatry. 

The  Hebrew  bible  says  and  all  versions  of  it  in  effect  say,  "  Thou 
shalt  not  make  unto  thyself  any  graven  image,  nor  the  likeness  of 
any  thing  in  heaven  above,  nor  in  the  earth  beneath.  Thou  shalt  not 
bow  down  to  them  nor  serve  them."  The  gentleman  made  as  hand- 
some and  eloquent  a  defence  of  the  practice  of  violating  this  solemn 
precept  as  could  be  well  imagined.  He  referred  us  to  the  tabernacle 
and  temple,  of  ancient  time  full  of  types — patterns  of  things  in  hea- 
ven, &c :  but  unfortunately  for  his  logic,  none  were  permitted  to  wor- 
ship these  patterns  of  ideas.  They  were  but  to  portray  the  things  to 
be  revealed  in  the  gospel  age — a  picture-book,  to  sketcn  the  outlines 
of  that  redemption,  which  the  Messiah  wrought,  and  of  the  worship 
of  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  They  never  presumed  to  worship  them, 
they  looked  through  these  outward  symbols,  or  signs  of  ideas,  to  the 
spiritual  substance  as  we  look  through  unfigurative  language  to  the 
sense. 

The  "  brazen  serpent,"  introduced  by  my  opponent,  had  the  authori 
ty  of  God,  for  its  being  made,  and  was  a  splendid  type  of  him  that 
destroyed  the  serpent,  that  old  serpent  the  devil,  who  had  bitten  the 
human  race.  When  men  bitten,  looked  at  it,  they  were  healed  :  but 
when  they  began  to  worship  it,  it  was  destroyed.  I  say,  it  had  the 
authority  of  God.  But  where  is  the  same  authority  for  carrying 
about  the  bones  of  a  dead  saint,  or  the  hair  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  or 
the  feet  of  Balaam's  ass  1  Where  is  the  first  word,  in  favor  of  wor- 
shiping or  making  an  image  of  the  cross,  or  of  the  Savior,  or  of  any 
saint?  or  of  venerating  a  grave,  a  relic,  or  a  picture  1 

My  opponent  ingeniously  asked,  if  the  name  of  God  were  not  a 
picture  1  Profound  reasoning  !  The  name  of  God  a  picture  of  the 
same  class  with  the  image  of  the  cross  and  of  the  Virgin  !  But  a 
mother  says  to  her  infant,  "  my  life !"  and  she  may  say  to  Lady  Mary 
in  the  same  style,  "  my  life  !"  Ingenious  !  I  would  ask  this  Roman 
Catholic  lady  when  she  looks  upon  her  child,  and  exclaims  "  my  life," 
if  she  feels  the  same  religious  affections,  the  same  pious  emotions, 
as  when  she  looks  up  to  the  Virgin  Mary  and  exclaims,  "  my  life  ?  " 
Is  not  the  gentleman  rather  playing  the  sophist,  or  sporting  in  jest, 
•than  gravely  reasoning  tlie  subject  1  Certainly,  he  would  not  so  teach 
his  coHgregation  in  the  absence  of  Protestants  !  This  is  as  felicitous 
and  as  rhetorical  as  his  allusions  to  the  device  and  images  on  medals, 
or  on  gold  and  silver  coin.  There  is,  indeed,  idolatry  here !  But 
there  is  no  hypocrisy  in  the  temple  of  mammon.  Moreover,  these 
worshipers  adore  not  the  image  of  money ;  but  the  money  itself. 


216  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Next  came  the  cherubim.  What  an  association  of  ideas !  What 
confusion  in  the  mind  that  associates  the  cherubim  in  Solomon's  tem- 
ple, with  the  image  on  a  dollar!  Is  the  gentleman  serious?  Did  the 
people  see  the  cherubim,  in  the  holiest  of  all  1  Aaron,  the  priest,  only 
stood  before  those  cherubim,  as  the  type  of  our  high  priest,  who  offers 
his  sacrifice  in  heaven:  and  Aaron  stood  there  only  once  in  a. year. 
If  he  understood  either  the  type  or  the  anti-type,  he  could  not  adduce 
it  either  for  the  worship  of  an  image  or  the  offering  of  any  sacrifice  on 
earth :  for,  like  Aaron  in  the  holiest  of  all,  Christ  offers  his  sacrifice 
in  heaven.  Aaron  presented  the  blood  upon  the  propitiatory :  but  Christ 
entered  once  f<n-  all.  As  the  bishop's  high  priest  is  not  in  heaven  but 
at  Rome;  all  the  sacrifice  which  he  can  offer  on  earth  is  not  worth  a 
farthing:  for  in  the  Christian  and  Jewish  sense,  no  sacrifice  on  earth 
can  avail  any  thing.  Such  were  the  types,  and  such,  certainly,  are  the 
anti-types.  Offerings  for  sin,  now,  are  only  made  in  heaven.  Th« 
very  allusion  to  Aa»on,  strikes  a  blow  at  the  priesthood  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  church,  as  if  God  had  not  accepted  in  heaven,  the  sacrifice  of 
his  Son,  and  called  for  their  assistance !  ! 

But  it  is  hinted  that  I  should  more  fully  prove  the  immorality  of  the 
Roman  Caiholic  rule  of  faith'.  I  have  no  lack  of  documents  on  this 
subject.  The  saint  Ligori,  by  the  help  of  saint  Pius  VII.  has  richly 
furnished  us  with  indubitable  authority.  "The  attorney  general  of  the 
devil  lives  at  Rome,"  says  my  opponent,  "and  prevents  the  beatifica- 
tion of  all  saints."  How  great,  then,  must  have  been  the  virtues  of 
St.  Ligori,  who,  in  spite  of  the  devil,  was  canonized  by  pope  Pius 
VII  ?  !  See  how  equivocation  is  taught  in  this  rule  of  faith  and  mo- 
rality : — 

"  To  swear,"  says  St.  Ligori,  "  with  equivocation,  where  there  is  a  good  rea 
ton,  and  equivocation  itself  is  lawful,  is  not  wrong.  And  If  a  person  swears 
without  a  good  reason,  it  is  not  to  be  considered  a  perjury;  since,  in  one  sense 
of  the  word,  and  according  to  mental  restriction,  he  swears  what  is  true."  Li- 
gor.  Lib.  iii.  N.  151.     [Synopsis,  159. 

Dissimulation  is  variously  taught. 

T — "  It  is  lawful,''  continues  Ligori,   "for  a  Catholic,  when  he 

is  passing  through  a  couhtrj'  belonging  to  heretics,  and  is  in  danger  of  losing  his 
life  or  property,  to  pretend  that  he  is  not  a  Catholic,  and  to  eat  meat  on  fast 
days."     Id.  Lib.  ii.  IS.  15.     [Synopsis,  p.  216. 

This  new  old  rule  of  faith  has  made  some  new  sins,  which  neither 
patriarchs  nor  Jews  did  ever  commit;  and  here  is  one  of  that  class 
■which  no  American  can  ever  commit : 

"  Is  it  a  mortal  sin,"  asks  the  saint,  to'steal  a  »maZZ  piece  of  a  sacred  relic?  An«. 
"  There  is  no  doubt,  hut  that,  in  the  district  of  Rome,  it  is  a  mortal  sin.  But  out 
of  this  district,  if  any  one  st^l  a  small  piece  of  a  relic,  it  is  probable  that  it  is 
lio  mortal  sin,  provided  the  relic  be  not  therebj'  disgraced,  nor,  its  value  less- 
ened; unless  it  be  some  notable  or  rare  relic,  such  for  instance,  as  the  Holy 
Cross,  or  the  hair  ofthe  blessed  Virgin  Mary,"  &c.  Id.  ib.  N.  532.  [Synopsis 
p.  167. 

There  is  a  secret  on  the  subject  of  infallibility^  which  the  saint  Li- 
gori has  begun  to  divulge.  Custom,  it  would  seem,  since  general 
councils  are  gone  out  of  fashion,  is  from  this  time  forth  to  be  the 
standard  of  orthodoxy  and  infallibility  ;  at  least,  in  morals.  Listen 
to  the  moral  theology  of  the  Romish  church  on  this  point : 

"Custom,"  says  the  saint,  "  is  defined  the  unwritten  law.  In  orderthat  custom 
should  obtain  the  force  and  obligation  of  law,  three  things  are  required.  1st. 
That  it  be  introduced  not  by  any  particular  person,  but  by  a  community,  or  at 
least,  by  the  majority  ot  a  community,  which  is  capable  of  making  laws,  al- 
though, in  fact,  said  community  cannot  make  the  laws.      2ndly.  It  is  required 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  217 

that  the  custom  should  be  reasonable."  Custom  has  a  threefold  state.  In  the 
beginning  all  those  persons  who  introduce  a  custom  contrary  to  law,  sin.  In 
process  of  time,  those  who  follow  a  custom  that  has  already  been  iutroduced 
by  their  ancestors,  do  not  commit  a  sin  in  following  the  custom,  but  they  can  be 
punislied  for  it  by  the  prince.  In  fine,  those  who  follow  a  custom  after  it  has 
become  a  rule,  neither  .sin,  nor  can  they  be  punished  for  it."     Id.  ib.  N.  107. 

"  Thk  time  required  according  to  the  canons  of  the  Romish 
CHURCH,  for  a  custom  TO  BECOME  A  LAW.  In  order  that  custom  should 
obtain  the  force  and  obligation  of  law,  it  is  required, 

"  3dly,"  continues  the  saint,  "  that  it  should  continue  a  long  time  with  re- 
peated acts.  In  regard  to  the  time  that  is  sufficient  to  render  a  custom  lawful, 
one  opinion  is,  that  it  is  to  be  left  to  the  judgment  of  the  prudent,  according  to 
the  repetition  of  the  acts,  and  the  quality  of  the  matter.  The  second  opinion  is, 
that  ten  years  are  required,  and  are  sufficient;  for  this  is  the  length  of  time  re- 
quired for  the  introducing  and  legalising  of  a  custom  by  the  canonical  law,  un- 
less it  be  in  some  place  where  the  contrary  is  sanctionecl."  Id.  ib.  Lib.  i.  N.  107. 
^Synopsis,  p.  183. 

*'  Merchandizing,  and  the  selling  of  goods  at  auction  on  the  Sundays,  is,  on 
account  of  its  being  the  general  custom,  altogether  lawful.  Buying  and  selling 
goods  on  the  Lord's  day  and  on  festival  days  are  certainly  forbidden  by  the  can- 
onical law,  but  where  the  contrary  custom  prevails,  it  is  excusable."  Id.  lb.  JS.  286< 

"  He  who  makes  use  of  the  knavery  and  cunning,"  says  the  saint,  "  which  is 
usually  practised  in  gambling,  and  which  has  the  sanction  of  custom,  is  not 
bound  to  restore  what  he  wins,  since  both  parties  know  that  such  tricks  are  cus- 
tomary, and  consequently  they  consent  to  them."     Id.  ib.  N.  882. 

Gambling  consecrated  for  priests  and  people  by  the  law  of  custom : 

"  We  will  now  show,  however,  ttie  canons  to  tlie  contrary,  notwithstaudmg, 
that  all  sorts  of  gambling  are  allowed.  This  we  prove  from  Ligori's  own  con- 
cessions.- He  teaches  as  follows; — "  The  canons,"  says  he  '"  which  forbid  games 
of  hazard  do  not  appear  to  be  received  except  inasmuch  as  the  gambling 
is  carried  on  with  the  danger  of  scandal.  Be  it  known,"  continues  he,  "that  the 
above  mentioned  canonical  law  is  so  much  nullified  by  the  contrary  custom,  that 
not  only  laymen,  but  even  the  clergy  do  not  sin,  if  they  play  cards  principally 
for  the  sake  of  recreation,  and/or  a  moderate  sum  of  money."  Id.  ib.  J\.  88^ 
f  Synopsis,  p.  235. 

A  new  way  of  sanctifying  the  sabbath : 

"Bull  fights  and  plays  allowed.  "On  the  entrance  of  a  prince  or  no- 
bleman into  a  city,  it  is  lawful  on  a  Sunday  to  prepare  the  drapery,  arrange  the 
theatre,  &c.,  and  to  act  a  comedy,  also  to  exhibit  the  bull-fights;  the  reason  is, 
because  such  marks  of  joy  are  morally  necessary  for  the  public  weal."  Id.  ib. 
N.  304.     [Synopsis,  p.  193. 

The  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  manners  makes  it  even  lawful  to  sin : 

"  It  is  lawful,"  says  Ligori,  "  to  induce  a  person  to  commit  a  smaller  sin,  in  or- 
der to  avoid  one  that  is  greater."     Id.  N.  77.     [Synopsis,  p.  255. 

"  Let  the  confessor,"  says  the  saint,  "  enjoin  upon  those  scrupulous,  who  are 
afraid  of  sin  in  every  action,  that  they  act  freely,  despise  their  scruples,  and  do 
contrary  to  what  they  dictate,  where  sin  is  not  evident.     [Synopsis,  p.  173. 

This  law  licenses  drunkenness  : 

"It  is  no  sin  to  get  drunk,  by  the  advice  of  a  physician,  if  one's  health  cannot 
otherwise  be  restored."     Id.  N.  76.     [Synopsis,  p.  254. 

Hence  drunkards  may  be  acceptable  communicants ! 

"It  is  lawful,"  says  Ligori,  "to  administer  the  sacraments  to  drunkards,  if 
the}'  are  in  tlie  probable  danger  of  death,  and  had  previously  the  intention  of 
receivirs  them."     Ligor.  vi.  N.  81.     [Synopsis,  p.  260. 

Ignorance  is  the  mother  of  devotion,  even  yet : 

The  slnner  must  be  left  in  ignorance. — The  doctrine  is  as  follows:  (I 
take  it  from  the  saint  verbatim.)  '*  If  the  penitent  (says  he,)  is  in  inculpable 
ignorance,  in  regard  to  those  things  concerning  which,  it  is  possible  to  be  invin- 
cibly ignorant,  although  this  ignorance  be  of  the  'law  of  God,'  and  the  confessor, 
prudently  thinks  that  to  admonish  the  penitent  would  not  correct  him.  then,  and 
in  that  case,  the  confessor  must  abstain  from  admonishing  the  penitent,  and  must 
leave  him  in  his  ignorance."     Id.  ib. 

Heretics  are  still  to  be  punished,  not  only  by  virtue  of  the  general 
T  28 


218  DEBATE    ON    THE 

council  of  Lateran,  A.  D.  1215,  which  says,  "Let  the  secular  powers 
be  compelled,  if  necessary,  to  exterminate,  to  their  utmost  power,  all 
heretics  denoted  by  the  church:"  but  according  to  the  moral  theology, 
as  reported  by  the  saint. 

Heretics  to  be  pu>'ished. — "  A  bishop  is  bound,"  sajs  Benedict  XIV.  "  even 
in  places  where  the  tribunal  of  the/io/y  inquisitionis  in  force,  sedulously  and  care- 
fully to  purge  the  diocese  that  is  committed  to  his  care,  from  heretics;  and,  if  he 
find  any  of  them,  he  ought  to  punish  them  according  to  the  cauons;  he  should 
however,  be  cautious,  not  to  hinder  the  inquisitors  of  the  Jhith  from  doing  their 
duty."     Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  378.     [Synopsis,  p.  294. 

From  the  influence  of  all  these  laws,  why  should  it  be  thought 
strange  that  the  clergy  are  exceedingly  corrupt]     Listen  to  the  saint: 

How  many  relapsing  sinners  are  involved  in  eternal  ruin  by  following  the 
directions  of  bad  confessors!  **The  saint  has  told  us,  that,  AJNlO^fli  THE 
PRIESTS,  WHO  LIVE  IN  THE  WORLD,  IT  IS  RARE,  AND  VERY 
RARE,  TO  FINd  ANY  THAT  ARE  GOOD."     [Synopsis,  p.  180. 

Yet  according  to  these  assumptions,  under  the  sanction  of  Christ, 
all  are  bound  to  hear  them  on  peril  of  damnation :  for,  "  he  that  hear- 
eth  you,  heareth  me  ;  and  he  that  despiseth  you,  despiseth  me:  and  he 
that  despiseth  me,  despiseth  him  that  sent  me."  So,  to  despise  these 
priests,  is  to  despise  God  ! 

Once  more,  from  Ligori,  and  I  shall  have  given  almost  a  specimen 
of  the  immorality  and  impiety  of  the  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith,  on 
general  points  of  religion  and  morality.  There  is  no  one  subject  on 
which  we  could  be  more  copious  than  this  one:  but  from  respect  to  our 
audience  we  shall  give  but  the  remotest  hint. 

"A  bishop,  however  poor  he  may  be,  cannot  appropriate  to  hunself  pecuniary 
fines  without  the  license  of  the  apostolical  see.  But  he  ought  to  apply  them  ta 
pious  uses,  which  the  council  of  I'rtnt  has  laid  upon  non-resident  clergymen, or 
upon  those  clergymen  who  keep  nieces.'"  Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444.  [Synop- 
sis, p.  294. 

Now,  if  a  priest  should  keep  a  niece,  it  is  a  very  expiable  and  tri- 
fling offence;  but  should  he  marry  a  wife,  he  must  be  excommunica- 
ted forever!  Thus  the  Roman  Catholic  rule  of  faith  trffats  the  Bible, 
and  annuls,  at  pleasure,  every  law  and  institution  of  heaven  !  Have  I 
not,  then,  my  respected  auditors,  fully  proved  the  fallibility  and  im- 
moral tendency  of  the  doctrine  and  iule  of  faith,  of  the  bishop's  church 
— to  say  nothing  of  that  system  upon  the  clergy  themselves,  who  ex- 
pound and  inculcate  it? 

One  word,  before  I  sit  down,  on  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  Greek 
and  Latin  fathers.  I  have  said  before,  and  I  repeat  it,  if  they  agree 
on  any  two  points,  they  are,  in  giving  testimony  to  the  scriptures,  and 
that  it  is  the  duty  of  all  to  read  them.  So  far  they  are  all  Protestant, 
and  not  Roman  Catholic— '[Time  expired.] 

Half  past  4  o^clock,  P.  M. 

The  extract  from  Chillingworth  will  be  viewed  by  men  of  intelli- 
gence, as  one  of  the  strongest  arguments  advanced  in  this  debatti  on 
the  Catholic  side  of  the  question.  And  it  may  be  as  well  to  observe, 
that  my  friend  has  probably  first  seen  it  in  the  Catholic  work,  the 
Amicable  Discussion,  from  which  he  has  quoted.  Chillingworth  was 
'distinguished  as  a  controversialist.  He  had  a  public  disputation,  like 
the  present,  with  some  Jesuits,  by  whom  he  was  not  only  defeated 
but  convertt-d  to  the  Catholic  faith.  But  yielding,  like  Gibbon,  to  the 
solicitation  of  friends,  the  importunities,  the  livings  presented  to  himi 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION  219 

or  to  which  he  was  presented,  by  Laud,  archbishop  of  London,  he  r^ 
canted,  and  finally,  as  it  is  on  good  grounds  asserted,  he  died  a  Jew. 
The  only  apology  he  could  offer  for  his  versatility  was,  that  he  found 
every  one  of  these  religions  in  the  bible — it  was  the  only  resting  place 
for  the  sules  of  his  feet — that  is  to  say,  he  trampled  upon  it,  to  f<ubserve 
the  purposes  of  base,  worldly  interest !  But  I  have  now,  thank  God, 
something  more  tangible  to  offer  in  the  way  of  proof,  that  nothing 
can  be  conceh'ed  more  inexcusably  unfair,  than  the  arguments  em- 
ployed against  the  Catholic  religion.  I  now  pledge  myself  to  shew 
to  every  man  of  honor  in  this  city,  that  the  last  allegation  read  by 
the  gentleman,  purporting  to  be  from  the  works  of  Liguori,  is  not  tu 
be  found  in  the  works  of  that  writer.  Ii  is  all  a  base  fabrication,  I 
will  not  say  of  Mr.  C. ;  but  of  somebody.  I  will  meet  this  charge 
with  a  complete  and  an  overwhelming  refutation.  We  have  now 
come  to  an  important  crisis  in  this  debate.  My  worthy  opponent  re- 
duced to  the  desperation  of  defeat,  like  a  drowning  man,  is  induced 
to  grasp  at  anything  and  to  resort  to  abuse.  But  this  will  not  sustain 
him.  He  cannot  now  quote  from  Du  Pin,  or  send  his  readers  back  to 
the  dark  ages,  and  draw  a  grossly  exaggerated  picture  of  the  personal 
frailties  of  a  few  popes  and  then  ask  if  there  can  be  a  drop  of  apostolic 
grace  in  the  whole  world.  I  have  three  editions  of  the  complete 
works  of  Liguori,  in  my  library,  or  in  this  city,  to  refer  to ;  and  in 
none  of  them  can  this  vile  doctrine  be  found.  Mark,  then,  the  pro- 
position, my  friends.  It  is  this.  That  priests  are  allowed  to  keep 
mistresses,  upon  payment  of  a  fine,  but  that,  if  they  marry,  they  are 
sxcommunicated  !  1  now  call  upon  Charles  Hammond,  Esq.  Judge 
Hall,  General  Harrison,  Judge  Este,  Judge  Wright,  or  any  other  five 
equally  learned  and  honorable  citizens  of  Cincinnati — for  I  only  men- 
tioned the  first  that  came  to  my  mind — to  decide  this  issue  of  fact 
1  pronounce  the  whole  charge  a  base,  unfounded  assertion,  and  I  again 
thank  Heaven,  that  I  am  in  a  city,  where  justice  will  be  done  to 
the  truth,  and  where  falsehood  will  be  triumphantly  defeated. 

The  volume  from  which  the  gentleman  has  been  all  day  reading,  is 
one  of  those  books  of  abomination  and  falsehood ;  j-ut  forth,  in  th#' 
city  of  New  York,  by  Smith,  Slocum  and  Co.  and  it  is  a  fair  specimen 
of  their  fashion  of  circulating  truth.  Does  it  not  furnish  strong  pre- 
sumption to  the  reflecting  mind,  that  there  must  be  something  divine 
in  the  religion  which  such  men  and  women  combine  to  abuse  ?  It 
was  the  monster  Nero,  notorious  for  parricide  and  lust,  who  first  drew 
the  sword  against  the  christian  religion.  Forget  not  then,  I  pray  you, 
my  friends,  the  proposition  that  is  before  us.  I  am  determined  not  to 
slumber  or  sleep  on  this  matter,  but  to  probe  it  thoroughly  and  ex- 
■pose  its  rottenness  to  the  world.  Mr.  Campbell's  allegation  against 
the  Catholic  church,  is  that  Liguori,  a  standard  moralist  in  that 
church,  teaches,  that  priests  may  keep  concubines  by  paying  a  fine,  but 
that  if  they  marry,  they  must  be  excommunicated.  Whereas  I  distinctly 
deny  that  Liguori  has  ever  taught  any  thing  so  abominable,  and  that 
all  who  say  so,  are  guilty  of  a  most  flagrant  violation  of  the  command- 
ment of  our  God,  which  says  "Thou  shalt  not  bear  false  witxes^j 

AGAINST  THV  NEIGHBOR."    Exod.  XX.   16. 

The  charge  of  suppressing  the  2nd  commandment,  while  proof  to  the 
contrary,  from  the  Catholic  catechisms  every  where  in  use  in  the  U.  S. 
and  from  every  Catholic  bible  in  the  world,  was  staring  him  iu  the  face, 
may  be  placed  along  side  of  the  foregoing!     Add  to  these,  the  hardi- 


220  DEBATE    OX    THE 

hood  T^ith  which  the  plainest  words  of  the  Redeemer,  the  emphatic 
declaration  of  St.  Paul,  and  the  highest  eulogy  of  the  Apocalypse 
on  the  superior  sanctity  of  the  unmarried  state,  have  been  violently 
tortured  by  my  opponent,  and  a  fair  estimate  may  be  made  of  the  re- 
spect he  entertains  for  the  bible.  Even  his  jests  are  but  little  help  to 
his  argument,  for  error  was  never  genuinely  witty.  And  when  he  af- 
fects to  laugh  at  St.  Paul  for  his  having  been  a  bachelor,  I  shall  con- 
tent myself  with  replying,  yes  !  St.  Paul  was  a  bachelor :  but  would 
he  not  have  looked  well,  with  seven  little  squealing  children  trotting 
after  him,  visiting  the  churches  of  Asia !  The  remark  of  St.  Paul, 
"  have  1  not  a  right  to  lead  about  a  sister  T"  has  reference  to  the  prac- 
tice then  early  introduced,  of  entrusting  in  some  cases,  the  instruction 
of  females,  to  persons  of  their  own  sex,  and  to  the  greater  facilities  af 
forded  in  this  respect,  to  the  apostles  and  preachers  of  Christianity,  to 
convey  the  knowledge  of  true  religion  to  promiscuous  society,  wheth- 
er Jewish  or  Pagan.  I  consider  marriage  a  holy,  nay,  a  divine  insti- 
tution. I  respect  the  sanctity  of  the  union,  and  pay  a  willing  tribute 
of  praise  to  the  eminent  virtue  of  persons  engaged  in  that  state ;  but 
I  must  reason  and  judge  with  Christ  and  St.  Paul,  that  if,  "  he  who 
marries  does  well,  he  who  does  not  does  better."  A  priest  assumes 
the  obligation  of  celibacy,  at  mature  age,  and  voluntarily.  God's 
grace  is  sufficient  for  him,  as  it  was  for  St.  Paul,  and  his  virtuous 
struggles  against  the  evil  spirit,  that  dared  to  tempt  even  the  Savior, 
in  the  desert,  and  Paul,  who  had  been  rapt  up  even  to  the  third  hea- 
ven, can  make  virtue  perfect  in  infirmity,  without  the  priest's  being  as 
foolish  as  the  thief,  who  cut  off  his  hands,  to  keep  himself  from  steal- 
ing. I  hope  however  that  my  opponent,  or  his.auxiliary.  Smith,  will 
not  be  tempted  to  cut  olf  his  hands,  for  stealing  from  Liguori,  what 
is  better  to  any  man  than  trashy  gold,  his  good  name.  One  word 
more.  If  marriage  were  as  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God,  as  celibacy, 
why  did  God  and  St.  Paul  direct  abstinence  from  marriage  privileges 
as  a  preparation  for  seasons  of  greater  devotion  1  According  to  my 
friend,  should  they  not  have  commanded  the  contrary? 

I  pass,  in  the  next  place,  to  relics.  The  chair  in  which  the  signers 
of  the  declaration  of  Independence  sat,  the  pen  with  which  they  wrote 
the  glorious  document,  a  bit  of  the  wood  of  the  tree  overshadowing 
the  grave  of  the  illustrious  Washington,  are  all  treated  with  respect, 
'  and  sought  for  with  avidity  :  shall  religious  memorials  alone  be  trea- 
ted contemptuously  1  What  says  the  scripture.  Acts.  xix.  11.  .^nd 
God  wrought  by  the  hand  of  Paul  more  than  common  miracles,  so  that 
even  then  were  brought  from  his  body  to  the  sick,  handkerchiefs,  and  aprons^ 
and  the  diseases  departed  from  them,  and  the  wicked  spirits  went  out  of 
them.  "  The  woman,  troubled  twelve  years,  with  an  issue  of  blood, 
said  within  herself,  "  if  I  shall  touch  only  his  garment,  I  shall  be 
healed,"  and  she  was  healed;  and  Jesus  turning  and  seeing  her  said:  Be 
(f  good  heart  daughter,  thy  faith  hath  made  thee  whole."  Even  ivithout faith 
or  consciousness,  there  is  a  miraculous  cure  recorded  in  IV  Kings  xiii. 
21.  "  And  Eliseus  died  and  they  buried  him.  And  the  Rovers  from. 
Muab  came  into  the  land,  the  same  year.  And  some  that  were  burying  a 
man,  saw  the  Rovers  and  cast  the  body  into  the  sepulchre  of  Eliseus.  And 
when  he  had  touched  the  bones  of  Eliseus,  the  man  came  to  life,  and  stood 
upon  his  feet.''"'  I  have  no  doubt  that  these  texts  have  never  been  read, 
or  at  least  reflected  on,  by  learned  Protestants,  like  my  friend,  who 
ridjoule  Catholics  in  the  pious  simplicity  of  their  souls,  for  venerating 


SOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  i>21 

dead  men's  hones.  If  the  corpse  of  a  prophet  who  had  never  seen  Je- 
sus Christ,  could  impart  such  a  miraculous  virtue,  as  to  resuscitate 
the  dead,  why  is  it  considered  absurd  to  invoke  the  prayers  of  thh 
living  and  beatified  spirit  that  knew  and  loved,  and  watched  over  the 
Savior  on  earth,  and  that  now  reigns  gloriously  with  him  in  heaven  V 
If  Eliseus  was  good,  was  not  Mary  good  1  If  the  prophet  of  the  Sa- 
vior had  so  much  power,  had  the  mother  of  the  Savior  none  1  Hav- 
ing now  disposed  of  celibacy  and  relics,  I  resume  the  subject  of  con 
fession. 

I  shall  now  proceed  to  vindicate  the  scriptural  origin,  the  moral 
tendency  and  the  immense  benefits  conferred  on  society  by  the  theory 
and  practice  of  the  sacrament  of  penance,  as  held  in  the  Catholic 
church,  from  the  weighty  charges  preferred  against  it  by  my  oppo- 
nent. On  this  subject  the  council  of  Trent,  ch.  vi.  teaches:  "  the  penance 
of  a  christian  after  his  fall  (from,  the  grace  of  baptism)  is  very  different 
from  that  of  baptism,  and  consists,  not  only  in  refraining  from  sins, 
AND  A  detestation  OF  THEM,  namely,  a  contrite  and  humble  heart,,  but 
also  in  a  sacramental  confession  of  them,  at  least  in  desire  and  at  a 
proper  time,  and  the  priestly  absolution ;  and,  likewise,  in  satisfac- 
tion, by  fasting,  alms,  prayers,  and  other  pious  exercises  of  a  spiritual 
life  ;  not,  indeed,  for  the  eternal  punishment,  which,  together  with  the 
crime,  is  remitted  in  the  sacrament,  or  by  the  desire  of  the  sacrament, 
but  for  the  temporal  punishment,  which  the  scripture  teaches  is  not 
always  wholly  remitted  as  in  baptism."  Such  is,  and  ever  has  been, 
the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  church,  which  thus  ascribes  the  whole 
glory  of  man's  justification  to  God,  through  Jesus  Christ,  our  only 
Savior.  She  teaches  that  God  alone  can  forgive  sin,  and  that  without 
sincere  sorrow,  which  induces  us  to  detest  sin  more  than  all  other 
evils  together,  the  words  of  absolution  would  be  a  mockery ;  and  this 
sorrow  may  be  called  contrition,  or  attrition,  the  name  matters  little ; 
it  must  be  true,  interior,  preter-natural,  universal,  sovereign  ;  that  is  to 
say,  it  must  come  from  the  heart,  and  from  a  motive  suggested  by 
faith ;  it  must  extend  to  all  sins  without  exception,  and  be  accompa- 
nied by  a  sincere  resolution  to  suffer  every  evil,  even  death  itself,  rather 
than  offend  God  any  more.  This  is  the  only  idea  of  penance,  as  a 
sacrament,  inculcated  by  the  Catholic  church,  and  from  this,  it  ap- 
pears, how  horrid  is  the  guilt  of  our  calumniators,  who,  when  they 
find  us  otherwise  invulnerable,  assail  us  with  the  poisonous  shafts  of 
slander  and  misrepresentation,  pretending,  while  they  know  full  well 
how  sincerely  we  reprobate  the  doctrine  they  impute  to  us,  that  the 
pope  grants  licence  to  commit  sin,  and  that  priests  forgive  it  for  money ! 

The  power  of  the  priests  to  absolve  the  contrite  sinner,  is  based  on 
the  texts,  John  xx.  Matthew  xvi.  where  Christ  gives  the  keys  of  hea- 
ven to  Peter,  and  Ch.  xviii.  13,  when  Ae  declares  to  all  the  apostles,  after 
breathing  on  them,  and  giving  them  the  Holy  Ghost,  "  Verily  I  say  unto 
you,  whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth,  shall  be  bound  in  heaven,  and 
whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth,  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  By  these 
words  we  consider  the  priest  vested  with  a  judicial  power  by  Jesus 
Christ,  to  bind  or  to  loose  from  sin ;  and  as  this  power  cannot  be  ex- 
ercised without  a  knowledge  of  the  sinner's  dispositions,  especially  as 
to  his  sorrow  for  past  sins,  and  his  sincere  resolution  to  refrain  from 
them  in  future,  which  knowledge  none  but  the  sinner  himself  can 
give,  we  conclude  on  the  necessity  of  sacramental  confession  to  the 
the  priest,  who  holds  the  place  of  Christ  in  the  spiritual  tribunal. 
T2 


222  DEBATE    OX    THE 

There  is  no  immorality  in  this  belief;  on  the  contrary,  the  most  in 
calculable  benefits  have  accrued  from  it  to  religion  and  to  society.  It 
my  friend  say  that  it  is  impious  to  ascribe  to  man  a  power  which  be- 
longs to  God  alone,  I  answer,  that  if  God  choose  to  give  such  power 
to  man,  it  would  be  impious  in  man  to  deny  such  power  to  God,  and 
a  grievous  sin  of  disobedience,  to  refuse  to  use  it.  If  he  persist  in 
saying,  that  man  cannot  be  empowered  by  God  to  forgive  sin  in  the 
sacrament  of  penance,  I  will  ask  him,  why  then  is  man  empowered 
to  forgive  sin  in  the  sacrament  of  baptism  1  I  ask,  why  does  he 
quarrel  with  Catholics  for  employing  the  words — "  I  absolve  thee 
from  thy  sins,"  when  Episcopalians  do  the  same?  Here  is  the  church 
of  England  book  of  common  prayer;  and  in  it,  1  read  as  follows: 
"  When  the  minister  visits  any  sick  person,  the  latter  should  be  moved 
to  make  a  fecial  confession  of  his  sins,  if  he  feels  his  conscience  troubled 
with  any  weighty  matter ;  after  which  confession,  the  priest  shall  absolve 
him,  if  he  humbly  and  heartily  desire  it,  after  this  sort  .•  "  Our  LordJesui 
Christ,  who  hath  left  power  to  his  church,  to  absolve  all  sinners  who  truly 
repent  and  believe  in  him,  of  his  great  mercy,  forgive  thee  thine  offences, 
and  by  his  authority  committed  to  me,  I  absolve  thee  from  all  thy  sins, 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  Amen. 
Soon  after  kmg  James  I.  presented  to  the  world,  in  his  own  person, 
the  anomaly  of  head  and  member  of  the  English  church,  and  lord  spi- 
ritual and  temporal  of  the  realm,  he  asked  his  prelates  at  Hamj)ton 
court,  what  authority  this  church  claimed  in  the  article  of  absolution 
from  sin?  (Mark — the  new  Peter  did  not  know  his  powers  !)  Arch- 
bishop Whitgift  began  to  bamboozle  him  with  an  account  of  the  gene- 
ral confession  and  absolution  in  the  communion  service  ;  with  which 
the  king  being  dissatisfied,  Bancroft  bishop  of  London,  fell  on  his  knees 
and  said,  "  It  becomes  us  to  deal  plainly  with  your  majesty ;  there  is, 
also,  in  the  book,  a  more  particular  and  personal  absolution  in  the 
visiting  of  the  sick.  Not  only  the  confessions  of  Augsburgh,  Bohemia, 
and  Saxony,  retain  and  allow  it,  but  also  Mr.  Calvin  doth  approve 
both  such  a  general  and  such  a  private  confession  and  absolution.''''  "  I 
exceedingly  well  approve  it,  replied  his  majesty,  it  being  an  apostolical 
and  godly  ordinance."  Bancroft  was  right  in  quoting  the  Augsburgh 
confession,  for  the  Lutherans,  the  real  Simon  Pure  of  the  reformation, 
in  the  confession  of  faith,  and  apology  for  that  confession,  expressly 
teach,  "  that  absolution  is  no  less  a  sacrament  than  baptism  and  the  Lord's 
supper;  that  particular  absolution  is  to  be  retained  in  corfession,  that  to 
-eject  it  is  the  error  of  the  Novatian  heretics;  and  that  by  the  power  of  the 
keys,  sins  are  remitted,  not  only  in  the  sight  of  the  church,  but  in  the  sighz 
of  God.'''  Luther  himself,  in  his  catechism,  required,  that  the  penitent  in 
confession  should  expressly  declare  that  he  believes  "  the  forgiveness  of  the 
priest  to  be  the  forgiveness  of  God." 

On  this  topic,  before  talcing  up  the  volnminoiis  evidence  before  me 
for  the  doctrine  of  the  Episcopalians,  on  this  side  the  great  water,  1 
must  produce  evidence,  not  to  be  contradicted  by  the  champion  of  all 
Protestantism.  It  is  that  of  the  redoubted  Chillingworth.  Treating 
of  the  text,  John  xx.  22,  3,  he  asks  :  "  Can  any  man  be  so  unreason^ 
able  as  to  imagine,  that  when  our  Savior,  in  so  solemn  a  manner,  having 
first  breathed  upon  his  disciples,  thereby  conveying  and  insinuating  the 
Holy  Ghost  into  their  hearts,  renewed  unto  them,  or  rather  confirmed  that 
gionoits  commission,  whereby  he  delegated  to  them  an  authority  of  bind 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELtGION.  223 

ing  and  loosing  sins  upon  earth,  can  any  one  think,  I  say,  so  unworthily 
if  our  Savior,  as  to  esteem  these  words  of  his  for  no  better  than  cotnpli-' 
mcnt  ?  Therefore,  in  obedience  to  his  gracious  will,  and  as  I  am  tuar- 
ranted  and  enjoined  by  my  holy  motJier,  tJie  church  of  England,  (j)ou  see 
Protestants  use  the  style  '  holy  mother  church''  as  well  as  Catholics)  I  be 
seech  you  that  by  your  practice  and  use,  you  will  not  suffer  that  commis- 
sion  which  Christ  hath  given  to  his  ministers,  to  be  a  vain  form  of  words, 
wthout  any  sense  under  them.  IVhen  you  find  yourselves  charged  and 
oppressed,  have  recourse  to  your  spiritual  physician,  and  freely  disclose 
ilte  nature  and  malignity  (f  your  disease.  And  come  not  to  him  only 
with  such  a  mind  an  you  would  go  to  a  learned  man,  as  one  that  can 
speak  comfortable  things  to  you  ;  but  as  to  one  that  hath  authority,  dele- 
gated  to  him  from  God  himself,  to  absolve  and  acquit  you  of  your  fins. 
Jf  you  shall  do  this,  assure  your  souls,  that  the  understanding  of  men,  is 
not  able  to  conceive  the  transport,  and  excess  of  joy  and  comfort,  which 
shall  accrue  to  that  man^s  heart,  who  is  persuaded  he  hath  been  made  par- 
taker of  this  blessiiig." 

An  accredited  writer  in  the  New  York  Churchman,  of  the  7th  Jan. 
one  of  the  ablest  periodicals  in  the  United  States,  quotes  the  most 
convincing  texts  from  Origen,  Cyprian,  Basil  and  Gregory,  under  the 
head  of  antiquity. 

Origen  (flor.  A.  D.  220)  in  Horn.  10  in  Numb. 

"Laicus  si  peccet,  ipse  siiuui  non  potest  auferre  peccatum,  sed  indiget  sa- 
cerdote,  ul  passit  reiiussionem  peccatorutii  accipere."  The  same  father,  in  his 
seventh  homily  on  Luke,  "  Si  enini  hoc  fecenmus  at  revelaverimus  peccata 
nostra,  non  solum  Deo;  sed  et  his,  qui  possunt  mederi  vulneribus  nostris  atque 
peccatis;  delcbuntur  peccata  nostra  ab  eo,  qui  ait,  ecce  delebo,  ut  nubcm,  iniqui- 
tates  tuas  et  sicut  caliginein  peccata  tua."  (l,at.  ver.  ex.  Taylor.) 

St.  Cyprian  (flor.  A.  D.  240)  in  lib.  de  lapsis. 

"  Confiteantur  singuli,  quieso  vos,  fratres,  delictum  suum;  dum  adhuc,  qui  deli- 
qult,  in  sasculo  est,  dum  admitti  ejus  confessio  potest,  dum  satisfactio,  et  remis- 
810  facta  per  sarerdotesai)ud  Dominuin  grata  est." 

St.  Basil  (flor.  A.  D.  360)  in  Regul.  explic.  et  Reg.  Brev.;  228. 

AeT  tJuv    rsTxyfiiVJjv   ^xxttov    /j^t'S'tv    (*iv  T»jj  4'"**i«  x*v>jjt<36    «.7rJxpu$ov  ^uX.xo-(r«iv    a\X* 

St.  Gregory  M.  (flor.  A.  D.  590)  in  horn.  26  in  Octav.  Pascho. 

"Caus;c  pensanda>  sunt,  et  cum  ligandi  atque  solvendi  potestas  exercenda,  vi- 
deudum  est,  quae  cul])a  ante,  qute  sit  poenitentia  scquuta,  post  culpam;  ut  quos 
oninipotcns  Ueus  percompunctionisgi"atiani  vivificat,  illos  pastorissententiaabsol- 
vat:  tuncenim  vera  est  absolutio  praesidentis  cum  eterniarbitriumsequiturjudicis." 

"When  St.  James  exhorts  all  christians  'to  confess  their  sins  to  one  another,' 
rertainly  it  is  more  agreeable  to  all  spiritual  ends,  that  this  be  done  rather  to 
the  curate  of  souls,  than  to  the  ordinary  brethren.  The  church  of  England  is 
no  way  engaged  again.st  it,  but  admires  it  and  practises  it.  The  Calvinist  church- 
es did  not  pmctise  it  much,  because  they  knew  not  well  how  to  divest  it  from 
Us  evil  appendages,  which  are  put  to  it  by  the  customs  of  the  world,  and  to 
which  it  is  too  much  exposed  by  the  interests,  weaknesses,  and  partialities  of 
men.  But  they  commending  it,  shew  they  would  use  it  willingh',  if  they  could 
order  it  unto  edification.  •'  Interim  quin  sistant  se  pastori  oves,  quoties  sacram 
coHiam  participare  volunt,  adeo  non  reclamo,  ut  maxime  velim  hoc  ubique  obser- 
vari."  Calvin.  Institut.  liber,  iii.  c.  4.  Sec.  12,  13.  And  for  the  Lutheran- 
churches,  that  it  is  their  practice,  we  may  see  in  Chemintios,  2.  part.  Gan. 
Cone.  Trid.  Cap.  5.  de  Poenit.  who  is  noted  to  this  purpose  by  Bellannine:  only 
they  all  consent  (how  very  consistently)  that  it  is  not  necessary,  nor  of  divine 
institution."     Jeremy  Taylor  of  auricular  confession. 

•'For  they  who  are  spotted  icith  sins,  unless  they  be  cured  with  the  priestly 
authority,  cannot  he  in  the  bosom  of  the  church,"  said  Fabianus  JUarlyr  {cited 
by  Taylor.) 


224  DEBATE    02V    THE 

Translation  of  the  above  extracts  from  tSi  Latin  fathers. 

(1)  If  a  layman  sin,  he  cannot  himself  take  away  his  sin,  but  has  need  of  a  priest,  thai  ha 
may  obtain  the  remission  of  his  sins. 

(2)  For  if  we  do  this,  and  reveal  onrselres  not  only  to  God,  but  to  those  who  can  heal 
oar  wounds  and  sins,  our  »ins  will  be  blotted  out  by  him,  who  says:  "Behold,  I  will  take 
away  your  iniquities  as  a  cloud,  and  your  sins  as  darkness." 

(3)  i  beseech  you,  brethren,  let  each  one  confess  his  sins,  while  he  who  has  sinned  is  yet 
in  life,  while  his  confession  may  be  admitted,  while  the  satisfaction  and  remission  made  by 
the  priests  is  ratified  with  God. 

(4)  It  behuvelh  each  subject  to  conceal  no  passion  of  his  soul,  but  to  reveal  the  bidden 
things  of  his  heart  to  those  entrusted  with  the  care  of  the  infirm. 

(5)  The  causes  are  to  be  weighed,  and  when  the  power  of  loosing  and  binding  is  to  be 
•xercised,  we  must  see  what  caase  preceded,  and  what  penance  has  followed  the  fault,  that 
the  sentence  of  the  pastor  may  absolve  those  whom  the  Omnipotent  God,  by  the  grace  of 
compunction,  enlivens:  for  then  the  absolution  of  the  minister  is  correct,  when  he  foUowi 
the  decree  of  the  eternal  Judge. 

£For  English  divines,  see  close  of  last  speech  of  Saturday,  January  21.] 


THURSDAY,  January  19th,  Half-past  9  J.  M. 
Thfe  3d   Proposition  being  read — 

"  She  is  the  Babylon  of  John,  the  Man  of  Sin  of  Paul,  and  the  Empire  of  the 
Youngest  Horn  of  Daniel's  Sea  Monster," 

Mr.  Campbell  rose  and  said  : 

I  could  have  wished,  my  fellow  citizens,  that  this  proposition  had 
been  nearer  the  close  of  this  discussion.  But  as  my  nine  propositions 
were  first  arranged  as  themes  for  lectures,  rather  than  as  propositions 
for  debate;  I  coold  not  materially  alter  either  the  verbiage  or  order,  af» 
ter  I  had  been  invited  to  discuss  them  with  my  present  opponent. 
Without  further  ceremony,  I  proceed  to  sustain  the  proposition. 

I  am  not  insensible  of  the  difficulties  and  objections  we  have  to  en- 
counter, when  we  presume  to  prove  any  thing  from  the  figurative  and 
symbolic  language  of  prophecy.  The  difficulties  are  not,  however,  so 
great  as  at  first  view  may  appear.  Symbols  are  exempt  from  some  of 
the  objections  lying  against  literal  descriptions — They  need  no  translatioru 
Sun,  moon,  and  stars  speak  the  same  sublime  language  to  every  eye, 
and  sucfgest  the  same  devout  and  lofty  emotions  to  every  heart,  A 
lion,  a  leopard,  a  bear,-^an  earthquake,  a  tempest,  a  swelling  sea,  are 
types  of  the  same  ideas,  and  call  forth  the  same  thrilling  sensations  in 
every  spectator.  Hence  the  wisdom  in  selecting  appropriate  symbols 
of  the  persons  and  scenes  which  fill  up  the  great  drama  of  human  exis- 
tence, and  diversify  the  prophetic  chart,  which  the  revealing  Spirit 
holds  up  to  the  eye  of  the  diligient  and  faithful  student  of  the  word  and 
providence  of  God. 

But,  as  on  a  globe  of  13  inches  diameter,  the  earth  with  all  its  oceans 
and  continents,  its  mountains  and  valleys,  its  lakers  and  islands,  cities 
and  districts,  can  be  displayed  in  the  proper  positions  and  relative  sizes 
of  all  its  parts,  and  in  an  instant  presented  to  the  eye;  so  in  a  symbol, 
can  be  grouped  together  all  the  grand  characteristics  of  a  people  or  an 
event,  and  so  accurately  and  comprehensively,  that  by  a  single  glance 
of  the  eye  more  can  be  learned  than  from  the  perusal  of  a  volume. 

This  is,  indeed,  an  advantage  which  figurative  representation  has 
over  that  which  is  purely  literal  and  descriptive.  By  a  glance  of  the 
eye  on  a  globe,  or  a  map,  one  can  have  a  better  idea  of  a  country,  or 
of  the  earth,  than  from  the  reading  of  volumes;  so  by  considering  a 
symbolic  representation,  we  may  acquire  a  more  vivid  and  comon 
hensive  view  of  a  subject  than  by  the  perusal  of  many  pages. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  225 

There  v^  but  one  eye  in  the  universe  that  pierces  al.  nature  through; 
to  which  Ih'i  past,  the  present,  and  the  future  are  equally  plain.  God 
alone  knows  the  future.  He  has  revealed  it.  In  the  seventh  chapter 
of  Daniel,  now  lying  hefore  me,  we  have  one  great  meridian  line,  which 
runs  from  the  Euphrates  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  and  from  the  reign 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  proudest  of  Assyrian  kings,  to  the  ultimate 
triumph  of  the  Gospel  throughout  the  whole  earth. 

We  shall  rapidly  sketch  the  contents  of  this  chapter,  which  embraces 
more  of  human  destiny  than  can  be  gleaned  from  all  human  records. 
Daniel  is  in  vision  translated  to  the  Mediterranean — the  great  sea — 
symbol  of  people  in  commotion  ;  as  the  earth  is  of  the  people  at  rest. 
There  can  be  no  more  appropriate  or  striking  picture  of  human  society 
than  the  sea.  Sometimes  it  is  tranquil  and  smooth  as  oil,  like  a  splen 
did  mirror  reflecting  the  azure  vault  of  heaven:  anon  it  is  ruffled  by 
a  gentle  breeze  that  ripples  softly  on  iis  bosom:  again,  it  swells  and 
foams  and  rages  in  huge  mountain  waves  that  strike  with  a  sublime 
awe  the  eye  of  every  beholder.  So  the  people  who,  to  day  are  all  in 
peace  and  amity  in  the  smooth  current  of  their  daily  avocations,  by  some 
evil  wind  or  passion  are  swollen  into  some  mob,  or  tumuU,  or  tre- 
mendous conflict,  which  for  a  moment  rends  the  social  compact, 
destroys  all  confidence,  and  jeopardizes  the  best  interests  of  all.  Thus 
in  the  symbol  now  before  us  ; — the  winds,  the  passions  of  men,  are  in 
some  great  tumult.  They  strive  upon  the  great  sea.  Four  terrific  and 
appalling  savage  monsters  in  quick  succession  rise. 

They  were  all  sea  monsters,  for  God's  symbol  of  a  tyrannical  gov- 
ernment has  always  been  a  savage  wild  beast.  The  first  was  like  a 
lion  wkh  eagle's  wings — the  fortunes  of  this  eagle-winged  lion  com- 
ing out  of  a  tempestuous  sea,  fitly  symbolized  Assyria  in  its  rise,  glo- 
ry, and  decline,  after  the  dynasties  of  more  than  fourteen  hundred  years. 

The  savage  beast,  like  to  a  bear,  raising  itself  on  one  side,  standing; 
with  three  ribs  in  its  mouth,  viz.  Babylon,  Lydia  and  Egypt,  represents, 
because  of  its  rapacity  and  cruelty,  the  empire  of  the  Medes  and  Per 
sians.  This  rose  from  the  sea  which  overwhelmed  the  Assyrian  pow 
er:  and  it  continued  for  two  hundred  years. 

A  leopard-like  monster,  with  four  heads  and  four  wings  upon  it. 
back,  indicates  the  rapid  conquests  of  Alexander.  His  short-livei 
empire  of  ten  years,  reared  upon  the  ruins  of  the  Medo-Persian,  ant 
spotted  with  various  nations,  finally  partitioned  among  his  own  foui 
principal  generals,  is  most  appositely  represented  by  the  symbol  of  the 
sixth  verse. 

But  a  fourth  beast,  dreadful  and  terrible,  and  strong  exceedingly 
having  great  iron  teeth  :  which  devoured  and  brake  in  pieces,  and 
stamped  the  residue  with  the  feet  of  it,  diverse  from  all  the  beasts 
that  were  before  it,  having  ten  horns,  portrays  the  Roman  empire  in 
those  fortunes  connected  with  the  principal  figure  in  the  group.  In 
terpreters  are  as  much  agreed  about  the  import  of  these  symbols  as  are 
lexicographers  in  defining  the  ordinary  words  of  human  speech.  For, 
although  they  may  differ  about  the  time  when,  or  the  place  where,  one 
of  these  symbols  may  rise,  or  fall,  there  is  scarcely  any  controversy  on 
the  symbols  themselves,  or  subjects  to  which  they  refer. 

But  the  principal  figure  in  these  four  monsters  remains  yet 
to  be  described.  "  I  considered,"  says  the  prophet,  "  and,  behold, 
there  came  up  among  them  (rather,  "  behind  them"  and  unobserv- 
ed)   another    little   horn,   before   which,  three    of  the  first  horna 

'  15 


226  DEBATE    0:«    THE 

were  plucked  up  by  the  roots."  Horns,  as  defined  by  the  Spirit,  mean 
kinffs  or  kingdoms.  The  Roman  empire  was  first  partitioned  between 
ten  kings  or  states,  after  the  irruption  of  the  northern  barbarians. — 
Pepin,  the  king  of  France,  gave  to  a  pope  of  Rome  one  horn,  viz.  the 
exarchate  of  Ravenna.  Charlemagne  gave  to  Peter's  successor  the 
kingdom  of  the  Lombards — the  second  horn ;  and  Lewis  the  Pious  con- 
firmed to  the  Pope  the  State  of  Rome,  a  third  horn  of  the  original  ten. 
Thus,  before  the  little  horn  became  very  conspicuous,  three  horns  made 
loom  for  it,  and  it  occupied  their  places. 

But  the  eleventh  horn  is  particularly  described  in  the  words  following, 
to  wit :  "  In  this  horn  were  eyes  like  the  eyes  of  a  man,  and  it  had  a 
mouth  speaking  great  things."  Here  vve  have  a  horn,  a  government, 
full  of  eyes, — sagacious,  politic,  cunning :  and  eloquent,  persuasive, 
boastful,  rhetorical,  for  such  are  the  chief  attributes  of  the  horn  full  of 
eyes,  having  a  mouth,  &c.  The  identification  of  this  horn  is  the  grand 
point  before  us.  We  shall,  therefore,  hastily  seek  out  its  distinguish- 
ing attributes. 

By  reading  the  chapter  with,  now  and  then,  the  interposition  of  a 
word,  we  shall  see  that  the  peculiarities  of  the  little  horn  are  clearly 
and  definitely  marked. 

"  I  beheld,"  says  Daniel,  "  I  contemplated  the  horns  till  the  thrones 
were  cast  down  (rather  set  up  :  as  in  the  Vulgate,  positi  sunt,)  and  the 
Ancient  of  days  did  sit,  whose  garment  was  white  as  snow,  and  the 
hair  of  his  head  like  the  pure  wool,  his  throne  was  like  the  fiery  flame, 
and  his  wheels  as  burning  fire.  A  fiery  stream  issued  and  came  forth 
from  before  him,  thousand  thousands  ministered  to  him,  and  ten  thou- 
sand times  ten  thousand  stood  before  him,  the  judgment  was  set  and 
the  books  were  opened.  I  beheld  then,  because  of  the  voice  of  the 
great  words  which  the  horn  spake,  I  beheld  till  the  beast  was  slain 
and  his  body  destroyed,  and  given  to  the  burning  flame."  Mark,  the 
entire  and  complete  destruction  of  the  beast  of  the  little  horn  is  as- 
signed to  his  arrogance  and  blasphemy, — because  of  the  words  which 
he  spake  against  God  and  his  saints.  The  other  beasts  simply  lost 
their  dominion,  but  their  lives  were  spared.  "  As  concerning  the  oth- 
er beasts,  they  had  their  dominion  taken  away,  but  their  lives  were 
prolonged."  So  ends  the  general  statement  concerning  the  whole,  and 
the  broken,  and  the  restored,  empire  of  the  fourth  beast.  j 

But  to  proceed  to  the  second  part  of  the  vision.  "  I  saw,"  &c. 
"  One  like  a  Son  of  man — {bar-enosh)  came  with  the  clouds  of  hea- 
ven, and  came  to  the  Ancient  of  days,  and  they  brought  him  near  before 
him,  and  there  was  given  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom, 
that  all  people,  nations,  and  languages  should  serve  him  ;  his  dominion 
is  an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not  pass  away,  and  his  king- 
dom that  which  shall  not  be  destroyed.-  I  asked  the  meaning  of  all  this, 
%o  he  told  me  and  made  me  understand  the  interpretation  of  the  things." 

We  have  now  an  interpretation  authorized  and  confirmed.  "These  great 
beasts  which  are  four,  are  four  kings  which  shall  arise  out  of  the  earth. 
But  the  saints  of  the  Most  High  shall  take  (receive)  the  kingdom, 
and  possess  the  kingdom  for  ever — even  for  ever  and  ever."  "  Then 
I  would  know  the  truth  (meaning)  of  the  fourth  beast  (empire,) 
and  of  the  ten  horns;  and  of  that  horn  that  had  eyes,  and  a  mouth  that 
spake  very  great  things,  whose  look  was  more  stout  than  his  fellows." 
The  interpreting  angel  then  explains  this  portion  of  the  vision.     "  The 


ROMAN    CATnOLIC    RELIGION.  227 

fourth  beast  shall  be  the  fourth  kingdom."  (King  and  kingdom  are 
sometimes  used  interchangeably.)  There  never  were  but  four  great 
universal  empires  on  earth,  and  there  never  will  be  another,  except  that 
of  the  Messiah. — His  universal  empire  will  be  the  fifth.  The  fourth 
beast  "  shall  devour  the  whole  earth,  and  shall  tread  it  down  and  break 
it  in  pieces." — So  did  the  Roman  empire-  And  the  ten  horns  are  ten 
kings  (or  kingdoms)  which  shall  arise  out  of  this  empire  or  kingdom  ; 
and  another  (the  little  horn)  shall  arise  after  them.  And  he  shall 
be  DIVERSE  (not  merely  political)  from  the  first  (ten)  and  he  shall  sub- 
due three  kings;  not  only  shall  three  of  the  kings  give  place  to* 
him, — but  he  shall  destroy  the  antagonist  power  of  the  three  empires 
that  preceded  his.  "  He  shall  speak  great  words  against  the 
Most  High,  and  shall  wear  out  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,  and 
think  to  change  times  and  laws. — (These  three  never  met  in  any  beings 
save  the  popes  of  Rome.)  And  they  shall  be  given  into  his  hand  un- 
til a  time,  and  times,  and  the  dividing  of  a  time." 

A  time  is  one  annual  revolution  ;  a  times,  two  ;  and  half  a  timfe, 
half  a  year;  in  ^W,  forty-two  xaoni\iS  ;  or  one  thousand  two  hundred 
and  three  score  days, — the  product  of  forty-two  thirties  ;  or  forty-two 
Jewish  months.  Of  all  this,  and  of  one  day  being  given  for  a  year, 
there  is  no  controversy  among  Catholics  or  Protestants.  The  continu- 
ance of  the  empire  of  the  little  horn  is  therefore  predesjined  to  twelve 
hundred  and  sixty  years. 

But  the  judgment  shall  sit.  The  long  prayed  for  and  expected  judg- 
ment shall  be  given  in  favor  of  the  saints.  Then  shall  be  taken  away 
his  dominion  to  consume  and  to  destroy  it  unto  the  end  or  consumma- 
tion. "  Then"  with  anticipated  triumph  be  it  spoken — "the  kingdom 
and  dominion  and  the  greatness  of  the  kingdom,  under  the  whole 
heaven  shall  be  given  to  the  people  of  the  saints  of  the  Most  High, — 
(They  were  not  all  worn  out  by  the  Little  Horn)  whose  kingdom  is  an 
everlasting  kingdom,  and  all  dominions  shall  serve  and  obey  him." 
Hitherto  is  the  end  of  the  matter. 

Now  of  all  these  items  the  sum  is  — 

1.  It  is  a  beast,  or  empire,  or  power,  that  grew  out  of  the  Roman  beast. 

2.  It  rose  after  the  empire  was  divided  into  ten  kingdoms. 

3.  It  was  a  new  and  different  power,  sagacious  and  politic— with 
human  eyes — an  eloquent,  persuasive,  and  denunciatory  power. 

4.  It  supplanted  and  displaced  three  of  the  original  states  of  the 
Roman  empire  or  of  the  ten  kingdoms  into  which  it  wjas  at  first  divided. 

5.  It  assumed  more  than  any  other  empire.  It  uttered  great  things 
and  its  look  was  more  stout  (daring)  than  its  fellows. 

6.  It  made  war  not  against  sinners,  like  other  empires — it  made  war 
against  saints. 

7.  It  prevailed  for  a  long  time  against  them.  It  "  wore  out  the  saints.''^ 

8.  It  presumed  to  change  times  and  laws.  How  many  fasts,  and 
feasts,  and  saints,  and  new  laws,  and  institutions  has  this  power  set  up  ! 

9.  It  had  power  to  hold  in  subjection  all  saints,  and  to  lord  it  over 
them  for  a  long  time. 

10.  It  was  to  be  consumed,  gradually  wasted  as  the  Protestant  Re- 
formation has  been  wasting  its  power  and  substance  for  three  centuries 
— and  is  yet  finally,  suddenly  and  completely  to  be  destroyed.  Can 
my  learned  opponent  find  all  these  characteristics  and  circumstances  in 
any  other  power  or  empire  in  the  history  of  all  time  !     I  trust  he  will 


228  DEBATE    ON    THE 

give  me  an  opportunity  to  expatiate  on  these  points  and  to  defend  them 
more  fully. 

Meantime,  to  excite  attention,  I  positively  affirm  that  these  items 
never  met  in  any  King,  Kingdom,  State  or  Empire,  save  that  of  Papal 
Rome.  There,  and  there* only,  can  they  all  be  found  as  large  as  life  ; 
and  as  exact  as  answers  the  image  in  the  mirror  to  the  face. 

But  I  hasten  to  identify  this  prediction  with  the  Babylon  of  John. 
And  in  doing  this  I  can  at  present  but  sketch  the  rudest  outline.  Let 
us  open  the  13lh  chapter. 

John  stands  in  vision  on  the  shore  of  the  great  sea,  the  Mediterrane- 
an. He  saw  a  savage  beast  rising  out  of  the  sea.  It  had  seven  heads 
and  ten  fiorns,  and  on  its  heads  the  names  of  blasphemy. — It  resembled 
the  lion,  the  bear,  and  the  leopard.  It  was  composed  of  all  that  is 
savage.  The  dragon,  the  serpent  of  my  opponent,  Pagan  Rome  gave 
him  his  power  and  his  throne,  and  great  authority.— How  much  does 
this  resemble  the  vision  of  Daniel  !  This  seven  headed  En»pire  with 
ten  horns — It  is  on  this  beast  the  woman  sat — subsequently  pictured 
out  as  Babylon  the  Great.  This  is  the  Latin  Empire  which  sustained 
the  Latin  church.  This  is  the  beast  out  of  which  the  Little  Horn  grew. 

The  wounded  head  or  the  imperial,  which  was  the  sixth  head,  was 
healed  by  the  great  Charles,  and  his  new  empire  controlled  by  the  ec- 
clesiastic beast,  spoke  blasphemies  and  daring  things  against  God,  his 
name,  and  all  that  dwell  in  heaven.  This  new  religious  and  political 
Empire  "made  war  against  the  saints  and  overcame  them."  "And  itcon- 
tinued  for  forty-two  months"  "a  time,  and  times  and  a  dividing  of  time.' 

His  dominion  extended  over  all  the  western  Roman  Empire.  But 
next  comes  the  Little  Horn— ihe  ecclesiastical  beast. — In  John's  vision 
this  beast  resembles  a  lamb,  but  it  speaks  like  a  dragon  !  Christian 
Rome  spoke  like  Pagan  Rome  !  It  obliged  all  the  earth  to  worship  the 
dragon — It  was  Qztholic! !  It  made  an  image  of  the  Pagan  beast.  It 
gave  life  to  this  image,  and  compelled  all  to  die  or  worship  the  image 
of  the  Pagan  beast.  It  was  then  a  bloody  persecutinor  beast.  It  was 
idolatrous  as  Pagan  Rome.  But  instead  of  worshiping  dead  heroes 
it  worships  dead  saints — instead  of  Goddesses  it  has  Lordesses  ;  angels 
instead  of  demi-gods. — 

Indeed  Papal  Rome  has  borrowed  much  from  Pagan  Rome — Old 
Rome  had  her pontifex  maximusl  her  purgatory,  priests  and  priestesses, 
her  victims  and  "  hosts."  She  had  her  lustral  water  as  modern  Rome 
has  her  holy  water.  She  had  her  vestal  virgins  as  her  descendant  has 
her  nuns.  She  had  her  Pantheon  as  modern  Rome  has  her  Vatican, 
and  in  the  niches  where  stood  the  gods  of  the  dragon  now  stand  the 
saints  of  the  Roman  Draconic  lamb.  -  ^ 

My  present  argument  requires  me  to  identify  this  beast  with  the 
Roman  church  or  with  the  Little  Horn. — And  therefore  in  addition  tc 
the  resembling  attributes  already  traced  I  proceed  to  the  most  definite 
of  its  marks.  "  Here  is  wisdom.  Let  him  who  has  understanding 
compute  the  number  of  the  beast :  for  it  is  the  number  of  a  man,  and 
his  number  is  six  hundred  and  sixty  six."— 

The  ecclesiastic  beast,  or  kingdom  is  thus  definitely  the  letters  of  a 
name  which  together  make  666.  The  name  of  a  man  is  the  name  of 
this  kingdom.  Now  we  begin  with  a  Roman  saint — even  with  the 
great  Irenceus.  We  shall  find  in  the  name  of  the  king  and  founder  of 
the  Latin  empire  the  name  of  this  prophetic  personage— It  is  said  by 


HOMAN   CATHOLIC    REMGION.  229 

<he  saint  that  among  the  Greeks  the  king's  name  was  written  Lateino$ 
the  letters  of  which  being  numerals  in  that  language  exactly  make  the 
aum :  for  a       30 

»         1 

T  300 
•  5 

10 

50 
6  70 

'        ^^"^ 
666 

He  made  the  name  of  the  founder  stand  for  the  name  of  the  empire. 
But  Bellarmine,  a  learned  Jesuit,  objects  to  this — that  in  the  language 
and  at  the  time  the  Revelation  was  written  the  orthography  of  this  name 
was  AscT/vof,  and  not  AaTi/vof.  And  this  being  so  there  is  a  plausible,  nay  a 
relevant  objection  aginst  the  interpretation  of  Irenseus.  We  pause  not 
to  examine  this  matter;  because  we  find  a  much  more  consistent  and 
convincing  exposition  in  the  true  and  proper  name  of  the  Institution 
which  in  Greek  was  always  written  in  full. 

H  A.TIM  ax,-. ;^,.»i  The  Latin  Kingdom.  H^8,  A=^30.  «=1,  t=300,  i=.10,  •■=50, 
11=8,  i3=2,  «=1,  !=200,  <=10,  \=30,  «=5,  '=10,  »=1  :    The  sum.  666. 

The  conclusion  from  these  premises  is,  that  as  there  is  no  other  king- 
dom on  earth  whose  name  is  exactly  666— and  as  the  beast,  the  symbol 
of  this  kingdom,  has  been  proved  to  be  the  Latin  empire,  and  He  La- 
tine  Basi/eia,  being  proved  to  contain  666,  this  definitely  and  clearly 
marks  out  the  Roman  Institution  as  that  to  which  the  I3th  chapter  of 
the  apocalypse  and  the  7th  chapter  of  Daniel  refer. 

The  only  question  of  apparent  difficulty  that  can  be  here  asked,  is  : 
— Whether  Rome  Pagan  or  Rome  Papal  is  intended  :  for  that  Rome 
is  intended  cannot  be  questioned.  That  it  is  Rome  Papal  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  what  is  called  the  second  Beast,  chap.  13,  verse  12,  is, 
chap.  18  and  20,  called  the  false  prophet — and  this  is  the  beast  whose 
name  is  given  as  numerically  equivalent  to  666. 

This  moreover  explains  that  love  of  Latin  which  to  this  day  distin- 
guishes this  party.  They  not  only  have  long  gloried  in  the  name  Ro- 
man or  Latin  Catholic  or  Church  of  Rome,  but  they  still  say  mass  in 
Latin,  and  perform  their  religious  services  in  that  dead  language  ;  for 
although  Paul  "  had  rather  speak  five  sentences  in  the  vernacular,  than 
ten  thousand  sentences  in  an  unknown  tongue"— that  he  might  edify 
his  hearers, — and  although  in  the  age  of  the  "  primitive  Fathers"  the 
whole  church  prayed  and  taught  in  the  language  of  every  country 
where  they  worshiped  ;  still  for  the  sake  of  Latin,  to  this  day  and  even 
in  this  country ,_ Romanists  perform  their  most  devout  services  in  that 
dead  and  foreign  tongue  as  though  God  himself  preferred  that  language 
to  every  other.  Thus  they  are  providentially  bearing  to  all  nations  and 
languages  the  grand  mark,  and  the  number  of  the  name  which  identifies 
them  as  the  beast  and  Babylon  of  John. 

To  return  to  the  imagery  of  the  Prophet  John  : — ^In  the  17th  chapter 
this  ecclesiastic  establishment  is  compared  to  a  great  harlot,  with  whom 
the  kings  of  the  earth  have  committed  fornication,  agd  as  having  intox- 
icated all  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  with  the  wine  of  her  whoredom. 
The  woman  is  further  identified  by  being  described  as  silting  upon  a 
icarlet  beast,  full  of  blasphemous  names,  having  teven  heads  and  ten 
horns;  and  she  is  adorned  with  purple  and  scarlet,  with  gold,  and  dia- 
monds, and  pearls  ;  having  a  golden  cup  in  her  hand,  full  of  the  abomi- 
nation and  pollution  of  her  whoredoms.     She  had  upon  her  forehead  hcl 


230  DEBATE    ON    THE 

name  written : — "  Mystery,  Babylon  the  Great,  the  Mother  of 
Harlots,  and  of  the  abominations  of  the  Earth."  And  to  make 
the  matter  more  certain,  the  Spirit  testifies,  verse  18  :  "The  woman 
which  you  saw  is  the  great  city  (spiritually  called  Babylon,  literally, 
Papal  Rome)  that  rules  over  the  kings  of  the  earth." 

Having-  thus  connected  these  symbols,  and  seen  the  co-adaptation  to 
the  same  subject  we  shall  here  introduce  the  Apostle  Paul  with  his 
plain  and  unfigurative  description  of  the  Man  of  Sin,  2d  chap.  2d  Thesh 
salonians,  and  examine  the  congruity  of  his  description  with  the  sym- 
bols of  Daniel  and  John.  He  may  be  regarded  as  the  literal  interpre- 
ter of  them  both. 

"  Let  no  man  deceive  you  by  any  means  :  for  that  day  shall  not  come, 
except  there  come  a  falling  away  first,  and  that  man  of  sin  be  revealed, 
the  son  of  perdition  ;  who  opposeth  and  exalteth  himself  above  all  that 
is  called  God,  or  that  is  worshiped;  so  thai  he,  as  God,  sitteth  in  the 
temple  of  God,  shewing  himself  that  he  is  God.  Remember  ye  not, 
that,  when  I  was  yet  with  you,  I  told  you  these  things  1  And  now  ye 
know  what  withholdeth  that  he  might  be  revealed  in  his  time.  For 
the  mystery  of  iniquity  doth  already  work;  only  he  who  now  letteth 
will  let,  until  he  he  taken  out  of  the  way.  And  then  shall  that  Wick- 
ed be  revealed,  whom  the  Lord  shall  consume  with  the  spirit  of  his 
mouth,  and  shall  destroy  with  the  brightness  of  his  coming:  Even 
him,  whose  coming  is  after  the  working  of  Satan,  with  all  powers,  and 
signs,  and  lying  wonders,  and  with  all  deceivableness  of  unrighteous- 
ness in  them  that  perish  ;  because  they  received  not  the  love  of  the 
truth,  that  they  might  be  saved."  Verses  3 — 10. 

The  Apostle  foretells  an  apostacy  (a  falling  away)  in  the  Church ; 
which  apostacy  would  issue  in  the  full  revelation  or  manifestation  of 
THE  Man  of  Sin,  (or  of  idolatry,  for  this  is  the  sin  of  Jews  and  Gen- 
tiles.) The  Man  of  Sin  is  again  designated  as  the  Son  of  Perdition. 
He  was  the  subject  of  past  prophecy  as  Judas  was;  for  on  that  account 
he  too  was  called  the  Son  of  Perdition — foredoomed  to  ruin.  The  names 
of  Man  of  Sin  and  Son  (fruin^  fitly  represent  this  apostacy.  The  at- 
tributes and  circumstances  peculiar  to  this  passage  are  the  following. 

1.  He  was  to  come  forward  stealthily  by  degrees  and  unobserved, 
(like  Daniel's  Little  Horn,  to  grow  up  behind  the  others)  "  The  secret, 
or  mystery  of  iniquity  already  inwardly  works." 

2.  He  could  not  be  revealed  till  "  He  who  restrains  or  lets  (the  Pa- 
gan power)  be  taken  out  of  the  way."  Political  power  as  well  as  ec- 
clesiastic was  necessary  to  his  development.  So  the  Little  Horn 
did  not  appear  conspicuous  till  after  the  ten  horns  grew  out  of  the 
fourth  beast.  The  Man  of  Sin  is,  in  historic  truth,  the  youngest  horn 
that  sprung  from  the  Pagan  beast. 

3.  He  was  to  exalt  himself  above  tfil  that  is  called  a  God,  or  an 
objact  of  worship.  My  learned  opponent  will  agree  with  me  that  God 
here  may  mean,  as  sometimes  it  does  in  the  Bible,  a  magistrate  or  king. 
And  certainly  not  only  in  the  arrogant  titles  which  he  assumes,J)ut 
in  the  dispensations  which  he  has  granted,  in  respect  to  laws 
divine  and  human,  no  magistrate,  king,  or  potentate,  ever  claim- 
ed so  much  on  earth  as  the  Man  of  Sin,  as  the  Popes  of  Rome 
He  is  not  only  styled  "  Universal  Father,"  "  Holy  F'ather,"  "  His 
Holiness,"  '-'Sovereign  Pontiff,"  "Supreme  Head  of  the  Church 
on  Earth,"  '-'  Pater  Familias,"  "  Successor  of  Peter,"  "  Prince  of  the 


HOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  231 

apostles,"  "Infallible  One,"  "Vicar  of  Christ,"  "Lieutenant  of 
Christ,"  "  Prince  of  the  Worid;"  but  he  is  styled,  still  more  blasphe-' 
mously,  "  Lord  of  Lords,"  a  god  on  earth,  "  Lord  God  the  Pope." 

4.  He  places  himself  "  in  the  temple  of  God."  This  ascertains  the 
Man  of  Sin  more  specifically  than  any  other  attribute  or  circumstance  in 
the  passage.  He  is  no  Pagan  idolater ;  he  is  no  infidel  Jew  ;  he  is  no 
author  of  a  new  religion ;  but  he  sits  in  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ- 
God's  building — God's  temple — holding  the  fundamental  truths  of  re- 

igion,  as  did  this  community  when  the  Man  of  Sin  invaded  the 
Church  ;  for,  yet,  the  grezt  facts  of  Christianity  are  acknowledged  by 
the  Church  of  Rome,  though  '■'■  made  of  no  effect  by  her  traditions." 

5.  He  exhibits  or  "  shows  himself  to  oe  a  god."  He  claims  to 
reign  not  only  for  Christ  as  his  vicar,  but  the  homage  due  to  a  repre- 
sentative of  God  he  haughtily  appropriates  to  himself.     Such  is  the 

Erediction  of  the  man  of  sin  ;  and  who  that  is  conversant  with  the 
istory  of  the  popes  of  Rome,  from  their  coronation,  standing  on  the 
altar  in  St.  Peter's  church,  receiving  the  title  of  God's  vicegerent, 
assuming  the  honors  of  the  supreme  head  of  the  whole  church ;  pow- 
er over  the  angels  of  heaven,  over  the  inhabitants  of  Hades,  and  over 
the  laws  and  statutes  of  the  bible,  can  think  that  Paul  exaggerates  the 
picture  by  saying  that  this  son  of  perdition,  and  man  of  sin,  was  to 
pass  himself  off,  was  to  "  show  himself  as  a  God." 

6.  He  is  called  the  lawless  one  ;  verse  8,  "  the  wicked  one."  So  Da- 
niel's little  horn  is  represented  as  "  changing  (or  seeking  to  change)  the 
times  and  the  laws."  Instances  of  such  dispensations  and  indulgences 
could  be  multiplied,  ad  libitum,  demonstrative  that  such  have  always 
been  the  professions  and  assumptions  of  the  "  Princes  of  the  Jpostles." 

7.  But  another  incident  in  the  history  of  the  decline  of  the  man  of 
sin  deserves  our  attention,  and  singularly  identifies  him  with  the  em- 
pire of  the  little  horn.  "  Whom  the  Lord  shall  consume  (or  slay)  by 
the  spirit  of  his  mouth,  and  destroy  by  the  brightness  of  his  coming." 
And  of  the  dominion  of  the  little  horn,  says  Daniel :  "  They  shall 
consume  and  destroy  it  to  the  end."  Paul  seems  to  have  quoted  the 
very  words  of  Daniel,  and  thus  most  unquestionably  identified  the 
man  of  sin  and  little  horn  as  designating  the  same  apostacy  from 
Christ  and  his  religion. 

8.  In  describing  the  coming  of  this  man  of  sin,  he  is  compared  to 
the  deceptions,  assumptions,  and  approaches  of  Satan,  who  has  often 
assumed  a  divine  mission  or  the  power  of  miracles.  So  the  Roman 
church  has  ever  pretended  to  the  power  of  working  miracles,  and  has 
gained  and  still  retains  much  power  by  false  signs  and  lying  wonders. 

Of  this  apostacj',  and  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  this  man  of  sin, 
as  described  by  Paul,  we  may  mark  his  growth  and  progress  in  full 
agreement  with  the  records  of  authentic  history  in  the  following  order 
and  style : — He  was  an  embryo  in  Paul's  time.  (The  mystery  of  in- 
iquity doth  already  inwardly  work).  He  was  an  infant  in  the  time  of 
Victor  1.,  195.  He  was  a  bold  and  daring  lad  in  the  time  of  Constan- 
tine  the  Great.  A  sturdy  stripling  in  the  days  of  Leo  I.,  when  au- 
ricular confession  came  in.  He  was  nineteen  years  old  in  the  days 
of  Justinian's  code ;  and  a  young  man  full  twenty-one,  when  Boni- 
face III.  received  from  Phocas  the  title  of  Universal  Patriarch  or 
Pope,  A.  D.  606.  He  was  twenty-five  when  Pepin  and  Charlemagne 
gave  him  political  power  and  glory,  A.  D.  760:  and  at  full  prime,  or 
at  thirty-five;  when  Gregory  the  Great  took  the  crown  from  the    eaa- 


232  DEBATE    OX   TilE 

peror  Henry  and  gave  it  lo  Rudolphus.  He  had  reached  his  grand  cli« 
macteric  in  the  days  of  Wickliff,  and  Luther  gave  him  a  mortal  thrust, 
which  introduced  into  his  system  that  chronic  consumption  under  which 
he  has  ever  since  lingered.  But  it  remains  for  John  the  apostle,  and  last 
prophet  of  the  church,  to  declare  his  last  agony  and  final  overthrow. 

As  we  have  no  time  more  than  to  sketch  the  naked  outline,  we 
shall  hasten  to  the  consummation,  as' respects  the  Babylon  of  John 
so  exactly  identified  with  the  subject  before  us.  In  his  apocalyptic 
developments,  18th  chapter,  he  declares  her  final  doom.  My  propo- 
sition carries  in  it  the  indication  of  a  monster.  She  is  the  Slan  of 
Sin  !  Babylon  the  Great — a  city,  a  beast,  a  woman,  a  state,  a  persectu- 
ting  power  ,•  scarlet,  purple,  druriken  with  the  blood  of  the  saints,  with 
the  blood  of  the  martyrs  of  Jesus !  !  Mystery  !  By  mystery  she  rose, 
she  reigns  ; — her  mystery  of  purgatory,  transubstantiation,  relics,  mi- 
racles, signs,  sacraments,  and  unfathomable  doctrines,  have  given  her 
power:  for,  says  Paul,  (2d  Thess.  ii.)  describing  the  advances  of  this 
son  of  ruin,  and  lawless  one,  "  His  coming  is  according  to  the  ope- 
ration of  Satan,  in  all  power  and  lying  wonders." — Douay  Testament. 

Babylon,  the  ancient  capital  of  Chaldea,  great  as  it  was,  was  but 
the  type.  Her  antitype  is  the  spiritual  city.  This  city  sits  upon  the 
seven  mountains  of  the  "Zfo/y  Roman  Empire,"  which  the  heirs  of 
Pepin  erected.  For  thus  did  they  blasphemously  designate  the 
new  empire  erected  out  of  the  seven  grand  electorates  of  Germany ; 
the  seven  heads  of  that  empire  which  sustained  the  assumptions  of 
ftie  papal  see. 

But  we  have  now  to  do  with  her  overthrow.  The  means  of  her  decay 
are,  first,  the  spirit  of  the  Lord's  mouth.  The  reading,  preaching,  and 
circulating  of  the  Bible.  The  second  is  the  hatred  of  the  ten  horns ;  "For 
the  ten  horns  which  thou  sawest  upon  the  beast,  these  shall  hate  the 
whore,  and  shall  make  her  desolate  and  naked,  and  shall  eat  her  flesh 
and  burn  her  with  fire."  Flesh  is  the  symbol  of  riches.  And  riches 
she  has  had  beyond  comparison.  It  is  said,  that  in  two  churches  in 
Spain,  some  fifty  years  since,  there  were  more  gold  and  silver,  in 
saints,  apostles,  and  angels,  than  the  richest  sovereign  in  Europe  was 
worth.  Her  real  and  personal  estate  has  never  yet  been  valued.  But 
the  political  powers  shall  get  tired  of  the  cupidity  and  insatiable  ap- 
petite of  this  monster,  and  shall  plunder  her  resources  and  confiscate 
her  estate,  as  in  France  and  England,  and  thus  shall  her  ruin  com 
mence.  But  at  the  moment  when  judgment  shall  be  given  in  favor 
of  the  saints  of  the  Most  High, — when  the  hour  of  her  destruction 
has  come  suddenly  and  in  an  instant,  as  when  an  angel  hurls  a  mill- 
stone into  the  sea,  shall  Rome  with  all  her  glory  be  swallowed  down, 
and  engulphed  in  immediate  and  eternal  ruin.  We  do  expect  in  the 
final  catastrophe  of  Papal  Rome  a  combination  and  concentration  of 
Almighty  wrath.  The  vials  of  God's  fiercest  anger  await  her.  The 
Plagues  of  Eg3T)t,  Sodom,  and  Jerusalem  are  in  store  for  the  Son 
of  Perdition.  In  the  battle  of  Armageddon,  blood  shall  flow  for 
1600  furlongs,  to  the  bits  of  the  horses'  bridles.  It  is  remarkable, 
that  this  1600  furlongs  make  exactly  the  whole  extent  of  the  State  of 
Rome,  which  the  popes  have  so  long  held.  From  the  Tiber  to  the 
Po  is  just  200  miles  or  1600  furlongs.  Still  the  last  act  of  this  ap- 
palling drama  will  be  short.  The  artillery  of  Heaven's  vengeance 
biiall  burst  upon  her  in  a  moment ;  for  Omnipotence  has  a  long  con- 
troversy against  her  for  her  evil  dP/eds.    I  have  only  time  <o  add,  that 


ROMAN    CATHOUC    RELIGIOW.  233 

f  inings  said  by  Daniel,  Paul,  and  John  perfectly  harmonize  in  the 
suy»^ehness  and  completeness  of  her  destruction.  However  gradual, 
for  a  time,  the  consimiption  and  decay  of  her  strength  and  glory,  she 
will  die  a  violent  death ;  for  all  the  w^itnesses  attest  that  a  sudden  and 
overwhelming  destruction  awaits  her. 

But  amid  the  tremendous  darkness  of  this  dread  hour,  the  bright 
and  morning  star  of  Israel  appears :  for  as  soon  as  the  flying  angel, 
as  it  flits  across  the  heavens,  announces  in  words  of  everlasting  joy, 
that  the  hour  of  her  judgment  has  come,  the  angel  in  his  rear,  atten- 
dant on  his  flight,  shouts  triumphantly  from  east  to  west :  "  It  is  fal- 
len !  It  is  fallen !  Babylon  the  great  is  fallen !"  Then  shall  there  be 
"  voices  and  thunders,  and  lightnings,  and  the  universal  earthquake 
which  shall  bring  the  cities  of  the  Gentiles  to  the  dust."  Then  will 
be  the  lime  when  a  voice  from  heaven  exultingly  shall  say :  "  Re- 
joice over  her,  ye  holy  apostles  and  prophets ;  for  God  has  avenged 
you  on  her !  Then  the  immense  multitude  of  saints, — the  martyred 
millions  in  heaven  shall  say :  Hallelujah  !  Salvation,  and  glory,  and 
power  to  the  Lord  our  God  :  for  his  judgments  are  true  and  righteous  : 
tor  he  has  judged  the  great  harlot,  who  corrupted  the  earth  with  her 
fornication,  and  he  has  avenged  the  blood  of  his  servants  shed  by  her 
hand  !  And  a  second  time  they  said,  Hallelujah  !  and  the  smoke  of 
her  torment  ascended  forever  and  ever !" 

Then,  indeed,  shall  the  kingdoms  of  the  whole  earth  become  the 
kingdoms  of  the  Lord,  and  of  his  anointed.  Then  the  cause,  so  long 
oppressed,  shall  universally  triumph :  for  ages  of  prosperity  and  joy 
are  yet  to  crown  the  labors  of  Messiah ;  and  untold  millions,  the 
trophies  of  his  mediation  are  yet  to  gladden  hfeaven  and  earth  by  their 
cheerful  submission  to  his  authority,  who  shall  then  be  acknowledged 
the  rightful  Kiiig  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords. 

Such  a  catastrophe  is  even  feared  at  Rome  itself.  The  popes  have 
uttered  it  abroad  ;  they  have  proclaimed  to  the  world  that  they  felt  St. 
Peter's  chair  tremble  under  them ; — that  the  throne  of  the  prince  of 
the  apostles  now  totters  to  its  fall.  In  dolorous  strains  they  lament  in 
their  encyclical  letters  the  prevalence  of  liberal  (with  them  infidel) 
principles.  Even  in  Italy  and  in  Spain  the  sovereign  pontiff  observes 
indications  of  the  spirit  of  the  age.  Free  discussion,  the  liberty  of 
the  press,  or  even  a  whisper  about  free  government,  in  the  environs 
of  Rome,  grievously  afilicts  him.  It  has  beefi  said  by  the  most  intel- 
ligent in  the  internal  affairs  of  Roman  Catholic  countries,  that  it 
would  not  be  the  most  unexpected  event  if  the  present  incumbent  of 
the  Papal  chair  should  be  the  last  of  the  popes  of  Rome. 

Public  opinion  is  fast  changing  even  in  those  countries,  and  there 
18  an  under-current  which,  like  a  subterraneous  fire,  is  liquifying  the 
foundations  of  the  hills  and  mountains  on  which  this  proud  super- 
structure rears  its  aspiring  head.  The  pope  is  looking  abroad,  per- 
haps to  the  "  mountains  of  the  moon,"  or  to  the  great  valley,  as  to  a 
wilderness,  in  which  there  may  be  an  asylum  reared  for  him  in  such 
a  contingency  as  might  drive  him  from  the  Eternal  city.  Who  knows 
but  that  the  ecclesiastic  politics  of  Roman  Catholic  Europe  have 
aided  the  tide  of  emigration  prospectively,  on  the  chances  that  are  to 
decide  the  fortunes  of  the  hierarchy  in  the  Old  World. 

But  the  destinies  of  western  Rome,  the  theatre  of  the  prophecies 
before  us,  exhaust  the  symbols  of  thp^c  j.iedictions.  The  fortunes 
of  our  country  ztnd  of  tlxe  Papacy  here,  belong  to  another  chapter. 
U2  3U 


234  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Whether  it  shall  simultaneously  fall  in  the  New  world,  or  shall  seek 
here  to  recruit  its  shattered  interests,  and  seek  to  found  a  great  Ame- 
ricau  Roman  Catholic  hierarchy,  is  a  question  of  grave  import, 
which  it  is  not  my  province  to  examine. 

Such,  however,  are  its  origin,  its  history,  and  its  doom  in  the  Old 
world,  as  sketched  by  the  finger  of  God.  And  the  history  of  Eu- 
rope, for  twelve  hundred  and  thirty  years,  proves,  beyond  a  reasonable 
doubt,|that  Daniel,  Paul,  and  John  spake  as  tbey  were  moved  by  the 
Holy  Spirit. 

I  cannot  sit  down  without  an  apology  for  the  rudeness  of  this  great 
outline.  It  would  require  hours  to  fill  up  the  map  which  1  have  laid 
before  you.  I  have  endeavored  only  to  estab  ish  the  grand  landmarks, 
and  point  out  the  bearings  of  prophecy  upon  this  institution.  In  hopes 
that  my  learned  opponent  will  give  me  an  opportunity  to  fortify  the 
weak  points,  and  to  illustrate  the  obscure,  I  give  place  ;  having,  as  I 
judge,  redeemed  the  pledge  which  I  tendered  in  my  fourth  proposition : 
for  in  the  history  of  all  time,  no  person  will  ever  find  any  one  sub- 
ject in  which  so  many — nay,  all  the  grand  characteristics  of  this 
prophetic  tyranny,  so  clearly,  literally,  and  harmoniously  meet  as  in 
Papal  Rome.  On  this  point  I  challenge  special  investigation. — [Time 
expired,  plus  9  minutes.] 

Half  past  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

Before  I  take  review  of  my  friend's  last  speech,  I  wish  to  complete 
0iy  previous  one.  I  was  speaking  on  the  subject  of  auricular  and  pri- 
vate confession,  when  J  was  last  up,  and  endeavoring  to  prove  that  it 
was  a  practice  not  contrary  to  scripture,  nor  immoral.  I  have,  in  proof 
of  this  position,  quoted  authorities  from  scripture,  from  the  ancient  re- 
cords of  the  Catholic  church,  and  from  the  divines  and  practice  of  the 
English  church.  I  now  add  to  them,  a  quotation  from  the  discipline 
of  the  Methodist  church,  edition  of  1835,  New-York.  And,  to  show 
that  every  argument  addressed  to  you  by  my  friend,  falls  with  as  great 
force,  nay  greater,  on  Protestants,  I  will  read  the  following  extract, 
(p.  84.)  You  will  observe,  my  friends,  that  I  do  not  arraign  the  Me- 
thodists, as  immoral,  or  quote  their  discipline  from  insidious  motives  ; 
but,  to  show  that  our  practice  is  imitated  in  a  way,  by  which  it  is  not 
improved,  but  liable  to  great  abuse  ;  and  that  every  thing  that  is  said 
against  us,  may  be  said  against  others. 

Section  III. — "Of  the  Baitd  Societies.  "  Two,  three  or  four  true  believers,  who 
have  confided  in  each  other,  form  a  band. — Only  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  in  one  of 
these  bands,  all  must  be  men,  or  all  women ;  and  all  married  or  all  unmarried."  p.  83. 
'  Rtiles  of  the  Band  Societies."  "The  design  of  our  meeting  is  to  obey  that 
command  of  God,  Confess  your  faults  one  to  another,  and  pray  one  for  another, 
that  ye  may  be  healed."  James,  v.  16. 

"  Some  of  the  questions  proposed  to  one,  before  he  is  admitted  among  us,  may 
oe  to  this  effect."  p.  84.  "  1.°  Have  you  the  forgiveness  of  your  sins?  (a  pretty 
bard  question,  my- friends  to  answer,  when  the  scripture  assures  us,  Eccles. 
ix.  1,  "  Man  knoweth  not  whether  he  be  worthy  of  love,  or  hatred;"  in  other 
words,  whether  he  hath,  or  hath  not,  forgiveness  of  his  sins.)  5."  Has  no  sin, 
inward  or  outward,  dominion  over  you?  (What  scrutiny!)  6."  Do  you  desire 
to  be  told  of  your  faults?  7.°  Do  you  desire  to  be  tol3  of  all  your  faults,  and 
that  plain  and  home?  8."  Do  you  desire  that  every  one  of  us  should  tell  you 
from  time  to  time,  whatsoever  is  in  our  heart,  concerninp:  you?  9.°  Consiaer! 
Do  you  desire  we  should  tell  you  whatsoever  we  think,  whatsoever  we  fear, 
whatsoever  we  hear  concerning  you?  10.°  Do  you  des're  that  in  doing  this,  we 
(hould  come  as  close  as  possible,  that  we  should  cut  to  the  quick,  and  search 


ROHAN    CATHOLIC    EELIOION.  235 

your  he«rt  to  the  bottom?  11."  Is  it  your  desire  and  desigri  to  be  on  thiS  and 
all  other  occasions,  entirely  open,  so  as  to  speak  without  disguise,  and  without 
reserve?  5)::;j>  Any  of  the  preceding  questions  maybe  asked  as  often  as  occa* 
sion  requires:  the  four  following  at  every  meeting.  85.  1.°  What  known  sins 
hav«  you  committed  since  our  last  ujeeting?  2.°  What  particular  temptations 
have  you  met  with?  3."  How  were  you  delivered?  4."  What  have  you  thought, 
said,  or  done,  of  which  you  doubt  whether  it  be  sin,  or  not?" 

They  must  reveal  the  whole  soul  and  body,  inward  and  outward 
Bins;  and  I  defy  my  friend  to  quote  any  thing,  even  from  Smith's 
Liguori,  to  surpass  that.  In  the  Catholic  practice,  the  confession  is 
to  the  priest  alone  ;  who  is  bound  by  holy  vows,  before  God  and  man, 
not  to  abuse  his  trust ;  and  it  is  unheard  of,  that  a  priest  has  ever  vio- 
lated his  oath,  by  divulging  the  secrets  confided  to  his  ear,  as  the 
Btinister  of  the  sacrament.  But  tell  such  secrets  to  one  woman,  and, 
as  the  witty  Frenchman  said,  when  asked  why  he  began  a  deed  with 
the  words,  "  Know  one  woman,"  &c.  :  "  Why,  if  one  woman  knows 
it,  it  is  equivalent  to  "  all  rnen,"  for  they  will  all  know  it  soon  enough 
from  her."  (a  laugh.)  I  suspect,  that  my  opponent  also  suspects  by 
this  time,  that  he  has  got  into  a  pretty  bad^.  1  shall  be  amused  to 
see  how  he  will  eel  out  of  the  noose. 

Now,  my  friends,  I  have  advanced  Protestant  testimony,  to  show, 
either  that  the  champion  of  Protestantism  has  trodden  most  awfully 
upon  Protestants'  toes,  or  to  prove  that  the  Catholic  practice  of  con- 
fession is  not  immoral.  Did  time  permit,  I  might  cite  the  most  con- 
vincing testimony,  from  the  fathers  of  the  reformation,  and  from  the 
German  princes,  to  show,  that  when  the  restraints  of  the  confessional 
were  removed,  the  barriers  of  virtue  seemed  to  be  broken  down.  I  do 
not  choose  to  use  their  testimony  before  this  audience.  It  is  suffi- 
ciently well  known,  and  it  follows  from  it,  that  my  opponent  ought 
not  to  speak  ill  of  confession  ;  for  it  has  every  where  proved  itself  to 
be  a  useful  practice,  and  one  beneficial  to  society.  It  has  been  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  aids  to  justice,  in  cases  which  legal  process  could 
not  reach.  To  show  this,  I  will  relate  an  anecdote.  Some  one,  in 
New-York,  stole  a  quantity  of  silver  spoons,  and,  having  confessed 
the  crime  to  the  priest,  was  told,  that  neither  confession  nor  absolution 
could  be  of  any  avail,  without  restitution  of  the  ill-gotten  goods.  Res- 
titution was  accordingly  made.  Here  is  a  fine  practical  comment  on 
the  subject.  The  police,  having  heard  of  the  affair,  insisted  that  the 
priest  should  disclose  the  name  of  the  thief,  and  wished  to  compel  him 
to  do  so,  to  promote  thereby,  as  they  supposed  they  should  do,  the 
cause  of  justice.  The  priest,  of  course,  refused  to  commit  a  flagrant 
breach  of  trust,  and  modestly  contended,  that  the  cause  of  justice  was 
much  more  effectually  promoted,  by  the  course  which  a  priest  in  such 
case  pursued.  Restitution  had  been  made  :  was  not  this  enough  ? 
The  police  subpoenaed  him  to  appear  before  the  mayor  of  New-York, 
the  celebrated  De  Witt  Clinton,  who  decided  that  the  priest  could  not 
be  compelled  to  give  up  the  name.  The  lawyer  employed  by  the 
priest,  was  Mr.  Sampson,  a  Protestant,  and  an  ornament  to  the  bar. 
He  reported  the  trial.  Before  reading  his  speech,  touching  on  this 
very  topic  of  the  morality  or  immorality  of  auricular  confession,  hear 
the  admirable,  but  too  brief  preface,  he  has  prefixed  to  the  volume.  I 
am  sure,  every  high-minded  and  honorable  man  here,  whether  Pro- 
testant or  Catholic,  will  subscribe  cheerfully  to  his  sentiments.  "  The 
general  satisfaction  given  to  every  religious  denomination,  by  the  de- 


236  DEBATE   ON    THE 

cision  of  this  interesting  question,  is  well  calculated  to  dissipate  anti- 
quated prejudices  and  religious  jealousies ;  and  the  reporter  feels  no 
common  satisfaction  in  making  it  public.  When  that  adjudication 
shall  be  compared  with  the  baneful  statutes  and  judgments  in  Europe, 
upon  similar  subjects,  the  superior  equity  and  wisdom  of  American 
jurisprudence,  and  civil  probity,  will  be  felt;  and  it  cannot  fail  to  be 
well  received  by  the  enlightened  and  virtuous  of  every  community, 
and  will  constitute  a  document  of  history,  precious  and  instructive  to 
the  present  and  future  generations."  Having  produced  before  the 
court  a  book  called,  "  The  Papist  misrepresented,  and  truly  repre- 
sented," and  read  the  misrepresentation  first,  he  continued  : 

"The  papist  iitily  represented,  believes  it  daiiinabie  in  any  religion  to  make 
gods  of  men.  However  he  firmly  holds,  that  when  Christ  speaking  to  his  apos- 
tles said,  John  xx.  22,  "Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost;  whose  sins  you  shall jbr' 
give,  they  are  Jbr  given;  and  whose  sins  you  shall  retain,  they  are  retained;" 
he  gave  them,  and  their  successors,  the  bishops  and  priests  of  the  Catholic 
church,  authority  to  absolve  any  truly  penitent  sinner  from  his  sins.  And  God 
having  thus  given  them  the  ministry  (f  reconciliation,  and  made  them  Christ's 
legates,  2  Cor.  v.  18,  19,  20,  Christ's  ministers  and  the  dispensers  of  the 
mysteries  of  Christ,  1  Cor.  iv.  and  given  them  power  that  whatsoever  they 
loosed  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven.  Matt,  xviii.  18,  he  undoubtedly  be- 
lieves, that  whosoever  comes  to  them,  maki::g  a  sincere  and  humble  confession 
of  his  sins,  with  a  true  repentance  and  a  tirm  purpose  of  amendment,  and  a 
hearty  resolution  of  turning  from  his  evil  ways,  may  from  them  receive  absolu- 
tion, by  the  authority  given  them  from  heaven,  and  no  doubt  but  God  rutifiea 
above  the  sentence  pronounced  in  that  tribunal ;  loosing-  in  heaven  whatsoever 
is  thus  loosed  by  them  on  earth.  And  that,  whosoever  comes  without  the  due 
preparation,  without  a  repentance  from  the  bottom  of  his  heart,  and  real  inten- 
tion of  forsaking  his  sins,  receives  no  benefit  by  the  absolution;  but  adds  sin  to 
sin,  by  a  high  contempt  of  God's  mercy,  and  abuse  of  his  sacraments." 

No  wonder  then,  this  latter  being  the  true  character  of  confession,  if  the  bit- 
terest enemies  of  the  Catholic  faith  have  still  respected  it;  and  that  discerning 
minds  have  acknowledged  the  many  benefits  society  might  practicall)-  reap  .'rom 
it;  abstracted  from  its  religious  cliaracter.  It  has,  I  dare  say.  been  oftener 
attacked  by  sarcasm  than  by  good  sense.  The  gentleman  who  argued  against 
us,  has  respected  himself  too  much  to  employ  that  weapon,  and  I  believe  he  has 
said  all  that  good  sense  could  urge  against  it,  which  we  take  in  very  good  part. 

But  while  this  ordinance  has  been  openly  exposed  to  scoff  and  ridicule,  its 
excellence  has  been  concealed  by  the  very  secrecy  it  enjoins.  If  it  led  to  licen- 
tiousness or  danger,  that  licentiousness,  or  that  danger,  would  have  come  to 
light,  and  there  would  be  tongues  enough  to  tell  it.  Whilst  on  the  other  hand 
its  utility  can  never  be  proved  by  instances,  because  it  cannot  be  shown  how 
many  have  been  saved  by  it:  how  many  of  the  young  of  both  sexes,  have  been 
in  the  most  critical  juncture  of  their  lives,  admonished  from  the  commission  of 
some  fatal  crime,  that  would  have  brought  the  parents'  hoary  hairs  with  sorrovf 
to  the  grave.     These  are  secrets  that  cannot  be  revealed. 

Since  however,  the  ave«ues  that  lead  to  vice  are  many  and  alluring,  is  it  not 
wet!  that  some  one  should  be  open  to  the  repenting  sinner,  where  the  fear  of 
punishment  and  of  the  world's  scorn,  may  not  deter  the  yet  wavering  convert? 
If  the  road  to  destruction,  is  easy  and  smooth,  sijacilis  descensus  avemi,  may 
it  not  consist  with  wisdom  and  policy,  that  there  be  one  silent,  secret  path,  where 
the  doubting  penitent  may  be  invited  to  turn  aside,  and  escape  the  throng  that 
hurries  him  along?  Some  retreat,  where,  as  in  the  bosom  of  a  holy  hermit, 
within  the  shade  of  innocence  and  peace,  the  pilgrim  of  this  checquered  life, 
may  draw  new  inspirations  of  virtue  and  repose. 

If  the  thousaud  ways  of  error,  are  tricked  with  flowers,  is  it  so  wrong,  that 
somewhere  there  should  be  a  sure  and  gentle  friend,  who  has  no  interest  to  be- 
tray, no  care,  but  that  of  ministering  to  the  incipient  cure?  The  syren  songs  and 
blandishments  of  pleasure,  may  lead  the  young  and  tender  heart  astray,  and  the 
repulsive  frown  of  stern  authority,  forbid  return.  One  step  then  gained  or  lost, 
is  victorj'  or  death.  Let  me  then  ask  you  that  are  parents,  which  would  you 
prefer,  that  the  child  of  your  hopes  should  pursue  the  course  of  ruin,  and  con- 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  237 

iinue  with  the  companions  of  debauch  and  crime,  or  t'lrn  to  the  confessional, 
where  if  compunction  could  once  bring  him,  one  gentle  word,  one  well  timed 
adnionitiou,  one  friendly  turn  by  the  hand,  might  save  your  child  ironi  ruin,  and 
your  heart  from  una\  ailing  sorrow  1  And  if  the  hardened  sinner,  the  murderer, 
the  robber,  or  conspirator,  can  once  be  brought  to  bow  his  stubborn  spirit,  and 
kneel  before  his  frail  fellow  man,  invite  him  to  pronounce  a  penance  suited  to 
his  crimes,  aitd  seek  salvation  through  a  full  repentance,  there  is  more  gained, 
than  by  the  bloodiest  spectacle  of  terror,  than  though  his  mangled  limbs  were 
broken  on  the  wheel,  his  body  gibbeted  or  given  to  the  fowls  of  the  air.  if 
these  reflections  have  any  weight  at  all;  if  this  picture  be  but  true,  in  any  part, 
better  forbear  and  leave  things  as  they  are,  than  too  rashly  sacrifice  to  jealous 
doubts,  or  shallow  ridicule,  an  ordinance  sanctioned  by  antiquity  and  founded 
on  ex[^rience  of  man's  nature.  For  if  it  were  possible  for  even  faith,  that  re 
moves  mountains,  as  they  say,  to  alter  this,  and  with  it  to  abolish  the  whole 
fabric,  of  which  it  is  a  vital  part,  what  next  would  follow"?  Hundreds  of  millions 
of  christians  would  be  set  adrift  from  all  religious  fastening!  Would  it  be  better 
to  have  so  many  atheists,  than  so  many  christians .'  Or  if  not,  what  church  is  fit- 
ted to  receive  into  its  bosom,  this  great  majority  of  all  the  christian  world?  Is 
it  determined  whether  they  shall  become  Jews  or  Philanthropists,  Chinese  or 
Mahommedans,  Lutherans,  or  Calvinists,  Baptists  or  Brownists,  Materialists, 
Universal ists  or  DestructionistsJ  Arians,  Trinitarians,  Presbyterians,  Baxterians, 
Sabbatarians,  iMillennarians,  Moravians,  Antinoniians  or  Sandenianians,  Junipers, 
or  Dunkers,  Sliakers  or  Quakers,  Burgers,  Kirkers,  Independents,- Covenanters. 
Puritans,  Elutchisonians,  Johnsonians,  or  Muggletonians.  I  doubt  not  that  in 
every  sect  that  I  have  named,  there  are  good  men,  and  if  there  be,  I  trust  they 
will  find  mercy,  but  chiefly  so  as  they  are  charitable,  each  to  his  neighbor.  And 
why  should  they  be  otherwise?  The  gospel  enjoins  it;  the  constitution  ordains 
it.  Intolerance  in  this  country  could  proceed  from  nothing  but  a  diseased  afl^ec- 
tion  of  the  pia  mater,  or  the  spleen."     Catholic  Question  in  America,  p.  87. 

I  will  now  dismiss  the  question  of  confession.  There  are  nnany  things 
to  which  I  should  like  to  give  answers,  in  set  speeches;  but,  whoever 
reads  this  controversy,  must  not  suppose  that  because  I  have  not  time 
to  answer  every  accusation  at  length,  there  is  no  answer  to  them.  I 
catch  all  I  can  of  what  my  friend  hurriedly  utters  ;  for  I  cannot  hear 
him.  for  his  occasional  hoarseness  of  voice. 

When  my  worthy  opponent  stated,  in  his  long-blazoned  proposition, 
"  She  is  the  man  of  sin,"  I  imagined  that  he  meant  no  more  than  the 
exciting  of  an  innocuous  laugh  at  the  expense  of"  Mother  Church," 
by  making  a  man  of  her  in  her  old  age.  How  great,  then,  has  been 
my  surprise,  to  see  him,  all  sail  set,  dash  headlong  upon  this  rock  of 
commentators,  the  "infames  scopulos  interpretum,"  around  which  are 
scattered  in  profusion,  the  wrecks  of  so  many  learned  lucubrations,  for 
the  last  1800  years  !  Catholics  and  Protestants,  churchmen  and  lay- 
men, ancients  and  moderns,  Papias  and  Newton,  and  last,  not  least, 
Mr.  Alexander  Campbell,  have  all  egregiously  foundered  upon  this 
hidden  shoal  of  controversy. 

No  wonder,  the  learned  Protestant,  Scaliger,  observed  that  Calvin 
was  wise,  in  not  writing  upon  the  Apocalypse.  "  Sapuit  Calvinus,  quia 
in  ^pocalypsin  non  scripsit .'"  Had  we  a  congregation  of  scary  old 
women,  instead  of  intelligent  and  sensible  men,  around  us,  I  should 
expect  to  be  looked  at  by  many  a  prying  eye,  confident  of  seeing  ont., 
at  least  of  the  ten  horns,  sprouting,  or  already  strong,  full-grown,  and 
threateningly  prominent  from  my  forehead.  But  as  I  address  reaso- 
ners,  not  visionaries,  nor  rhapsodists,  nor  fanatics,  I  miist  reason, 
leaving  to  my  fanciful  friend,  the  regions  of  imagination,  into  which 
he  has  flown,  far  above  my  reach. — I  would  not  fetch  him  too  hastily 
down,  but  by  sending  a  few  arguments,  at  respectful  distances  after 
one  anotlier  to  plu-'k  a  feather  now,  and  a  feather  then  from  his  wings, 


238  DEBATE    OS    THfe 

we  may  fetch  him  safely,  and  slowly,  and  with  dignity  back  again  to 
the  apprehension  of  logic,  and  common  sense.  These  are  the  wea- 
pons with  which  I,  in  the  first  place,  proceed  to  grapple  with  the 
gentleman. 

1st.  Is  he  an  infallible?  He  pretends  not,  verily,  to  be  such. 
Then  what  is  all  his  fanciful  theory  worth  1  It  is  based  on  reason  and 
history,  is  it?  Well  but  Hugo  Grotius,  and  Hammond,  and  Dr. 
Herbert  Thorndike,  not  to  mention  fifty  others,  of  different  religious 
denominations,  but  all  Protestants,  and  at  least  as  good  biblical  and 
classical  scholars,  as  my  learned  antagonist,  have  ridiculed  the  notion 
of  calling  the  pope  of  Rome  Antichrist !  If  only  one  learned  and 
pious  Protestant  were  pitted  against  my  friend,  I  would  be  even 
with  him,  or  more  than  even. — How  much  superior  in  this  argument, 
when  I  have  so  many  wise  men  on  my  side,  while  all  the  monoma- 
niacs are  on  his  ?  "  Let  them  not  lead  people  by  ike  nose,^^  says  Thorn- 
dike,  "  to  br.lieve  they  can  prove  their  supposition  that  the  pope  is  anti- 
christ, and  the  Papists,  Idolaters,  when  they  cannot  "  Thus  the  most 
learned  and  orthodox  Protestant  divines  cannot  subscribe  to — they  are, 
on  the  contrary,  ashamed  of— this  interpretation  of  my  learned  opponent, 

2nd.  Those  Protestants,  who  agree  with  him  in  calling  the  pope, 
antichrist,  disagree  as  to  the  particular  pope  to  be  so  called,  and  still 
more,  as  to  the  time  when  the  downfall  of  Babylon  was  to  have  taken 
place,  or  is  to  take  place — as  in  the  case  of  the  Jewish  testimony 
against  Jesus  Christ,  there  is  no  agreement  among  the  witnesses. 
Braunbom  confidently  asserts  that  the  popish  antichrist  was  born  in 
the  year  86 ;  that  he  grew  to  his  full  size  in  376 ;  that  he  was  at  his 
greatest  strength  in  636;  that  he  began  to  decline  in  1086;  that  he 
would  die  in  1640  ;  and  that  the  world  would  end  in  1711.  (Bayle  Art. 
Braunbom)  bishop  Newton,  Napper,  Fleming,  Beza,  Melancthon,  Bul- 
linger,  had  all  their  peculiar  and  conflicting  theories,  and  none  of  them, 
we  may  safely  assert,  has  found  the  Apocalyptic  key.  Turien,  Alix  and 
Kett,  are  in  nothing  more  wise,  and  equally  unsuccessful. 

3d.  The  scripture  is  opposed  to  him.  For  St.  John  says,  1st  Ep. 
ch.  2.  V.  22.  "  That  the  liar  who  deni&th  Jesus  to  be  the  Christ  is 
antichrist."  Now  this,  the  pope  has  never  done  ;  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, he  contends  earnestly  for  the  faith  in  the  divinity  of  Christ,  once 
delivered  to  the  saints. 

4th.  Church  history  is  opposed  to  him.  For  it  shews,  at  everj 
page,  how  the  pope  sent  missionaries  into  every  part  of  the  world 
even  the  most  distant,  to  gather  barbarous  nations  into  the  fold  ot 
Christ,  to  preach  to  them  salvation  through  his  blood.  Now  accord- 
ing to  the  rule  of  the  Savior,  "  a  kingdom,  divided  against  itself, 
cannot  stand."  And  it  is  unheard  of  among  all  the  signs  of  the  anti- 
christ, that  he  was  to  be  the  strenuous,  and  for  many  centuries,  the 
only  apostle  of  the  true  Christ,  the  Savior.  Even  the  worst  pope, 
was  true  to  doctrine,  and  made  the  beams  of  the  sun  of  righteousness, 
of  pure,  christian  faith,  gild  the  villages  of  Tartary  and  cheer  the 
roving  horde  5  in  its  deserts. 

5th.  My  friend  is  opposed  to  himself;  for  he  said  to  day,  that  the 
eyes  of  the  little  horn  signified  wisdom  and  knowledge.  Now  as  the 
Catholic  church  is  the  mother  of  ignorance,  the  victim  of  blind  and 
ridiculous  superstitions,  the  cause  of  all  the  obscurity  of  the  dark 
ages,  she  cann  t  be  the  antichrist.     Again  its  mouth  indicated  elo- 


ROIVLAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  239 

quence,  was  eloquent. — Then  my  opponent  is,  himself,  the  beast,  foi 
his  speech  was  truly  eloq.uent.  Indeed  the  ingenuity  with  which  he 
dressed  up  even  the  old  story  of  "  she  is  fallen,  the  mighty  Babylon, 
the  great  harlot,  which  corrupted  the  earth — AUelujah,  Allelujah  !'* 
is  proof  positive  that  he  would,  by  his  command  of  language,  deceive,  if 
possible,  even  the  elect,  into  the  belief,  that  he  had  succeeded,  where 
so  many  had  failed,  in  breaking  the  seal  of  the  mysterious  volume. 
He  has  clearly  put  the  lion  in  a  net,  and  not  so  much  as  a  mouse 
durst  approach,  to  gnaw  a  hole,  to  let  him  out. 

6th.  He  is  opposed  to  Catholics.  For  they  have  been  wont  to  ap- 
ply the  words  of  St.  John,  just  before  he  speaks  of  the  antichrist,  to 
the  Protestant  sects,  which,  they  conceive,  are  fast  hastening  into  the 
arms  of  the  Unitarians,  who  deny  the  divinity  of  Christ.  "They 
went  out  from  us  ;  but  they  were  not  of  us  ;  for  if  tliey  had  been  of 
us,  they  would,  no  doubt,  have  remained  with  us,  but  that  they  may 
be  manifest  that  they  are  not  all  of  us."  I  have  already  said  some- 
thing of  the  "  monster,"  not  merely  "  beast,"  but  "  monster,"  which 
my  friend  attempted,  like  Prometheus,  to  form  and  steal  fire  from 
heaven  to  animate,  that  he  might  call  it  "  Apostolic  Protestantism." 
This,  in  our  estimation,  may  be  found  to  possess,  some,  at  least,  of 
the  characteristics  of  the  Apocalyptic  beast.  But  we  should  beg  leave 
to  baptize  it  "  Polypos"  or  "  Legion."  We  could  very  satisfac- 
torily shew  that  it  has  made  war  on  the  saints,  and  devoured  them 
by  thousands,  not  to  say  millions  ;  that  a  portion  of  the  beast  so  detains, 
even  now,  when  light  from  heaven  is  breaking,  millions  of  the  saints, 
of  those  who  for  the  Confession  of  Jesus  Christ  and  for  conscience 
sake  are  reduced  to  a  galling  servitude,  a  poverty,  and  a  degradation, 
far  worse  than  the  lot  of  the  negro,  of  the  southern  rice-fields. 

My  friend  began  by  observing  that  symbolical  language  gives  great 
scope  for  the  imagination.  It  sets  us  adrift  upon  a  sea  of  speculation. 
Is  he  ready  to  embark  upon  that  sea  1  Are  his  sails  trimmed  ?  Is  his 
compass  ready  1  If  the  sad  experience,  to  which  I  have  alluded,  has 
not  disinclined  him  to  the  voyage,  I  assure  him  that  he  will  find  it  to 
eventuate  like  that  of  the  three  wise  men  of  Gotham,  whom  our  illus- 
trious compatriot  Washington  Irving,  sent  to  sea  in  a  bowl.  We  may 
drift  with  every  wind,  and  current,  through  a  thousand  perils,  on  this 
wide  ocean  of  imagination.  But,  my  friends,  what  has  imagination  to 
do  with  this  question  ].  She  is  a  very  good  slave,  but  a  very  bad  mis- 
tress. Give  me  full  scope  with  your  imagination  and  1  can  prove  to 
you  any  thing  and  every  thing,  until  we  all  are  like  the  novel  and  ro- 
mance writers  of  the  present  day — "zn  fancy  ripe,  in  reason  rotten.''^ 
Novels  and  romances  are,  confessedly,  works  of  fiction.  They  are  not 
expected  to  contain  reason,  and  therefore  they  escape  censure.  But 
when  men  pretend  to  pass  off  their  day-dreams  for  the  oracles  of  Hea 
ven,  they  should  remember  the  law  of  Deuteronomy,  xiv.  5,  "  th(.i  the 
Prophet  and  forger  of  dreams  shall  be  slain,"  and  it  iney  tear  not  even 
the  fate  of  the  false  seer,  at  least,  they  should  apprehend  the  lash  ol 
criticism  and  ridicule.  I  know  in  this  good  city,  a  respectable  dame, 
who  is  not  a  Catholic,  but  who  has  written  a  ream  of  paper  on  the 
Apocalyptic  visions.  I  suggest  to  my  friend  that  he  may  possibly  ga 
ther  additional  light  on  the  subject,  by  comparing  notes  with  her.  She 
has  made  it  the  study  of  years,  and  on  one  occasion,  as  I  am  credibly 
informed,  under  the  influence  of  the  text's  inspiration,  she  came  into 


S40  SEBJCTE   ON   THB 

church,  with  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars  pictured  upon  her  dress,  and 
trailing  beneath  her  feet  as  she  solemnly  moved  through  the  aisle 
You,  sir,  may  have  surpassed  this  lady  in  eloquence,  though  of  that  1 
am  not  quite  sure,  but,  certainly,  she  was  a  match  for  you,  in  imagina- 
tion. My  friend  observed  that  the  sun  would  go  down,  it  would  take 
him  a  whde  day,  to  shew  the  audience  the  rationale  of  the  conceit  with 
which  he  has  favored  us — I  could  not  help  assenting  to  the  gentle- 
man's, remark,  and  saying,  in  my  mind,  that  it  was  even  so — nay,  that 
it  would  take  3fi5  days,  before  he  could  shew  that  there  was  anything 
in  it  that  was  reasonable, 

Southey  observes  that  the  "  Romish  church  was,  in  the  worst  of 
times,  HOWEVER  defiled,  the  salt  of  the  earth,  the  sole  conserva- 
tive PRmCIPLE,  BY  which  EuROPE  WAS  SAVED  FROM  THE  LOWEST    AND 

MOST  BRUTAL  BARBARISM ;"  and  yet  in  the  very  face  of  this  reluctant 
tribute,  by  a  first-rate  Protestant  historian,  Mr.  Campbell  labors 
to  demonstrate  that  this  very  church  was  Anti-Christ !  He  places 
her  on  the  Mediterranean,  although  it  is  a  weary  ride  before  you  reach 
her  splendid  domes  and  everlasting — maugre  the  liquifying — hills,  on 
which  she  sits,  in  humble,  if  in  queenly  majesty.  The  Tiber,  like  its 
namesake  in  the  district,  instead  of  being  called  a  sea,  may  well  be 
called  a  "  Goose  creeK''  now. 

My  friend's  Lexicography,  Iconisms  and  Synchronisms,  must  have 
all  passed  for  argument  strong  as  the  rock  of  Gibraltar,  in  his  own 
opinion.  It  is  unanswered  and  unanswerable.  He  says  that  God  al- 
ways by  a  beast,  means  some  monster  or  other.  Then  Jesus  Christ 
must  be  '  some  monster  or  other,'  for  what  is  the  cry  of  Heaven's  Ju- 
bilee at  the  end  of  all  things  ?  "  Behold  the  '  Lion''  of  the  tribe  of  Judah 
hath  prevailed  i'^  and  again — "  Worthy  was  the  Lamb  that  was  slain," 
&c.  &c.  My  friend  would  m;<ke  a  strange  havoc  with  the  language 
and  imagery  of  heaven — a  curious  monster  of  a  Lamb  and  a  Lion,  than 
which  notwithstanding  all  he  has  said,  I  will  force  him  to  confess  that 
there  can  be  nothing,  as  there  is  nothing,  more  beautiful  than  this  en- 
tire passage.  The  Evangelists  are  represented  in  the  vision  of  Eze- 
kiel  as  Beasts  and  Birds  of  prey.  Are  they  too  Anti-Christs'?  Eng- 
land has  chosen  the  Rampant  and  Roaring  Lion  for  her  emblem.  My 
friend  has  praised  and  dispraised  her.  What  portion  of  Anti-Christ, 
of  the  man  of  sin,  is  she?  She  has  persecuted — and  I  might  with  far 
more  truth  say  to  her,  what  the  martyred  Robert  Emmelt  said  to  Lord 
Norbury,  "  If  all  the  innocent  blood  your  ladyship  has  shed  could  be  col' 
lecled  into  one  great  reservoir,  your  Ladyship  might  swim  in  it."  INIy 
friend  spoke  of  Elizabeth's  long  life.  He  did  not  say  of  how  many 
years  she  abridged  the  life  of  the  ^^  Fair  Queen  of  Scots."  Politically, 
intellectually,  and  morally,  Rome,  or  if  you  will,  the  papacy  was  the 
Savior  of  Europe,  as  all  historians  agree.  How,  then,  could  she  be 
the 'Beast]'  It  is  preposterous.  Why  all  this  has  been  prophesied 
and  falsified,  and  prophesied  and  falsified  again.  Forty,  or  fifty  years 
ago,  as  my  venerable  friend  there  (Rev.  Mr.  Badin,  the  first  priest  or- 
dained in  the  United  States)  can  inform  you,  almanacs  were  published 
in  Kentucky,  stating  the  precise  day  and  minute,  when  the  Hallelujah 
was  to  be  intoned  for  the  Downfall  of  Babylon  !  The  day  has  passed, 
and  what  of  it?  I  have  got  a  book  here,  which  makes  Napoleon  Bo- 
naparte the  man  of  sin.  Born  on  an  Island,  in  the  Mediterranean, 
Corsica,  deriving  his  power  from  the  French  Revolution,  which  affect- 


HUMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  241 

r.d  to  crush  Ch'istianity,  I'infame;  which  substituted  decadi  for  Sa- 
oath  ;  profaned  temples :  adored  a  vile  woman  in  the  temple  of  God, 
immolated  and  expatriated  thousands  upon  thousands  of  priests,  and 
hoped  that  the  last  of  kings  might  be  strangled  with  the  viscera  of  the 
last  of  priests :  plucked  Pius  VII.  from  the  chair  of  St.  Peter,  drag- 
ged the  saints,  the  venerable  monks  by  their  beards,  from  the  horns  of 
the  altar,  &c.  &c.  The  Apocalypse  is  a  sealed  book,  which  God  has 
not  vouchsafed  to  unfold  to  man.  Better  practise  what  we  do  know, 
with  certainty,  of  his  adorable  will,  rather  than  blaspheme  what  we  do 
not  understand.  Meanwhile,  if  ever  there  was  made  a  plausible  appli- 
cation of  this  mysterious  prophecy,  behold  it  in  the  rise,  progress,  and 
•rrest  of  Mahommedanism.  The  sea,  or  lake,  the  year  666,  the  war 
on  Christ  and  the  saints ;  the  sword  and  Koran ;  the  watch-word  Be- 
lieve OR  DIE,  the  conspiracy  of  Christendom  during  the  crusades  U. 
check  its  power,  the  gloriously  disastrous  battle  of  Lepanto,  the  pre- 
sent crippled,  but  still  formidable  state  of  Islamism,  all  pictured  so 
vividly  as  almost  to  convince  us  that  we  have  surely  discovered  the 
object  of  the  prediction.  Let  us  read  from  Waddington.  I  shall  make 
a  few  brief  pauses  which  you  will  fill  up  by  appropriate  reflections. 
How  few  have  understood  the  appalling  dangers  that  this  civil  and 
religious  despotism  of  the  Impostor  of  Mecca,  threatened,  during  so 
many  ages,  to  Christianity  and  the  world  I 

"The  seventii  centurj"  was  marked  by  the  birth  ol  a  new  and  resolute  adver- 
sary, who  began  his  career  with  the  most  stupendous  triumphs,  who  has  tora 
from  us  the  possession  of  half  the  world,  and  who  retains  his  conquests  even  to 
this  moment.  Mahomet  was  born  about  the  year  570;  we  are  ignorant  of  the  pre- 
cise period  of  the  nativity  of  that  man  who  wrought  the  most  extraordi|»ary  re- 
volution in  the  affairs  of  this  globe,  which  the  agency  of  any  being  merely  hu- 
man has  ever  yet  accomplished.  His  pretended  mission  did  not  commence  till 
he  was  about  forty  years  old,  and  the  date  of  his  celebrated  flight  from  Mecca, 
the  Hedjirah,  or  era  of  Mahometan  nations,  is  622,  A.  D.  The  remainder  of  bis 
life  was  spent  in  establishing  his  religion  and  his  authority  in  his  native  land,  Ara- 
bia; and  the  sword  with  which  he  finally  completed  that  purpose,  he  bequeathed, 
for  the  universal  propagation  of  both,  to  his  followers.  His  commission  wa« 
lealously  executed;  and,  in  less  than  a  century  after  his  death,  his  faith  wat  un- 
interruptedly extended  by  a  chain  of  nations  from  India  to  the  Atlantic. 

The  fate  of  Persia  was  decided  by  the  battle  of  Cadesia,  in  636.  In  Syria. 
Damascus  had  already  fallen,  and  after  the  sanguinary  conflict  of  Yermuk,  where 
the  Saracens  for  the  hrst  time  encountered  and  overthrew  a  christian  enemy  the 
conquerors  instantly  proceeded  to  the  reduction  of  Jerusalem;  that  grand  reli- 
gious triumph  they  obtained  in  637.  In  the  year  followiiig"  Aleppo  slnd  Anti- 
och  fell  into  their  hands,  which  completed  the  conquest- of  Syria.  Thence  they 
proceeded  northward  as  far  as  the  shores  of  the  Euxine  and  the  neighborhood  of 
Constantinople. 

The  invasion  of  Egypt  took  place  in  638,  and  within  the  space  of  three  years, 
the  whole  of  that  populous  province  was  in  possession  of  the  infidels.  Alexan- 
dria-was thfe  last  city  which  fell;  and  in  somewhat  more  than  a  century  after  the 
expulsion  of  philosophy  from  Europe  by  a  christian  legislator,  the  schools  of 
Atrica  were  closed  in  their  turn  by  the  arms  of  an  unlettered  Mahometan. 

The  success  of  the  Saracens  was  not  inconsiderably  promoted  by  the  religious 
dissentions  of  their  christian  adversaries.  A  vast  number  of  heretics  who  had 
been  oppressed  and  stigmatized  by  edicts  and  councils  were  scattered  over  the 
surface  of  Asia;  and  these  were  contented  to  receive  a  foreign  master,  of  whose 
pnnciples  they  were  still  ignorant,  in  the  place  of  a  tyrant  whose  injustice  they 
had  experienced.  But  in  Egypt,  especially,  the  whole  mass  of  the  native  popula- 
tion was  untortunately  involved  in  the  Jacobite  heresy;  and  few  at  that  time 
were  found,  except  the  resident  Greeks,  who  adhered  to  the  doctrines  of  the 
church.  The  followers  of  Eutvches  formed  an  immediate  alliance  with  the  sol- 
diers of  Mahomet  against  a  Catholic  prince;  and  they  considered  that  there  was 
nothing  unnatural  in  that  act,  since  they  hoped  to  secure  for  themselves,  under  a 

V  16 


242  DEBATE   OS   THE 

Mahometan,  tie  toleration  which  had  been  refused  by  an  orthodox  government 
We  should  remark,  however,  that  this  hope,  the  pretext  of  their  desertion,  wa; 
with  manj  the  suggestion  of  their  malice:  that  beside?  the  recoHectioiTof  wrong-* 
«nd  the  desire  to  escape  or  revenge  them,  they  were  rDllanied  as  furiously  a» 
their  persecutors  bj  that  narrow  sectarian  spirit,  which  is  commonly  exc'ite# 
most  keenly  where  tlie  differences  are  most  trifling;  and  which,  while  it  <'xaggft 
rated  the  lines  that  separated  them  from  their  fellow  christians,  blinded  them  t' 
the  broad  gulf  which  divided  all  afike  from  the  infidel. 

From  Egypt,  the  conquerors  rushed  along  the  northern  shore  of  Africa;  an» 
though  their  progress  in  that  direction  was  interrupted  by  the  domestic  disseii 
tions  of  the  prophet's  family,  even  more  than  bj-  the  occasional  vigor  of  th» 
christians,  they  were  in  possession  of  Carthage  before  the  end  of  the  seventl 
century.  Thence  they  proceeded  westward,,  and  after  encountering  soMie  oppo 
sition  from  the  native  INIoors,  fittic  either  fi-om  the  Greek  or  Vandsil  ma^sters  ot 
the  country,  they  completed  their  conquests  in  the  year  709. 

Hitherto  the  Mahometans  had  gained  no  footing  in  Europe  j  and  it  mav  seeo 
strange  that  the  most  western  of  its  provinces  shoiud  have  been  that  wiiich  wa 
first  exposed  to  their  occupation.  But  the  vicinity  of  Spain  to  their  latest  coo 
quests,  and  the  factious  dissentiona  of  its  nobility,  gave  them  an  early  opporti? 
nity  to  attempt  the  subjugation  ot  that  country.  Their  success  was  ahiiost  unu- 
sually rapid.  In  711  they  overthrew  the  Gothic  monarchy  br  the  victory  of 
Xeres;and  the  two  following  years  were  sufficient  to  secure  their  dominion  otcf 
the  greatest  part  of  the  peninsula. 

The  waters  of  this  torrent  were  destined  to  proceed  stifla  little  farther.  Ten 
years  after  the  battle  ofXeres,  the  Saracens  crossed  the  Pyrenees  and  overraa 
with  little  opposition  the  southwestern  jjrovrnces  of  France — '^the  vineyards  of 
Gascony  ana  the  city  Bourdeaux  were  possessed  by  the  sovereign  of  Damas- 
cus and  Samarcand;  ami  the  south  of  France,  from  the  mouth  of  the  Garonne  ta 
that  of  the  Rhone,  assumed  the  manners  and  religion  of  Arabia.'  Still  dissatisfied 
with  those  ample  limits,  or  impatient  of  any  limit,  these  chifdren  of  the  desert 
again  iBBrched  forward  into  the  centre  of  the  kingdom.  They  ifere  encamped 
between  Tours  and  Poie<iers,  when  Charltes  Martel,  the  mayor,  or  dnke  of  the 
Franks,  enronntered  them.  It  is  too  much  to  assert  that  the  fate  of '  iristianity 
•depended  upon  the  result  of  the  battJe  which  foHowed;  but  if  victr  y  had  de- 
clared for  the  Saracens,  it  would  probably  have  secured  to  them  in  France  the 
same  extent,  perhaps  the  same  duration,  of  authority  which  they  possessed  inr 
Spain.  Next  they  would  have  carried  the  horrors  of  war  and  Islamfsm  into  Ger- 
many or  Britain;  but  there,other fields  must  have  been  fought,  against  nations  of 
warriors  as  brave  as  the  Franks,  by  an  invader  who  was  becoming  Fess  power- 
ful and  even  fess  enthusiastic,  as  he  advanced  farther  fi^om  the  head  of  his  resour- 
ces and  his  faith."  Wadding-ton's  Church  Hist.  p?g<- 135.  iVew  York  edit.  1835. 

This  is  the  tyranny  from  which  the  pope  has  saved  us,  and  for  it 
civilization  and  religion  owe  him  a  debt  which  they  will  never  be 
able  to  repay.     • 

My  opponent  ran  a  parallel  betw^een  pagan  and  Catholic  Rome, 
Does  he  not  know  that  the  pagan  religion  borrowed  many  of  its  es- 
«ential  rites,  and  not  a  few  of  its  forms,  from  the  indistinct  knowl- 
edge of  a  primary  revelation  made  to  Adam  and  to  the  patriarchs- 
and  afterwards  from  the  written  law  ?  Aiwi  might  I  not  rHn  a  more 
perfect  parallel  between  the  Catholic  and  the  Jewish  institutions, 
while  the  latter  was  divixe  1  The  Catholics  have  a  Pontilcx  Maxi 
mus,  or  High  Priest;  so  had  the  Jews.  Tlte  Catholics  have  a  church 
to  guide  the  people ;  the  Jews  had  a  synagog^ie  for  tiie  same  purpose. 
The  Catholics  have  a  famous  temple,  to  whose  doctrine  and  worship 
all  must  conform;  so  had  the  Jews.  The  Catholic  pontiff  enjoys  some 
temporal  power;  so  did  the  Jewish  pontiff.  The  Catholic  pontiff  sprin- 
kles holy  wafer  on  the  people;  the  Jewish  pontiff  sprinkled  them  with 
the  blood  of  a  heifer,  that  was  slain.  'ITte  Catholic  says,  whtn  re- 
minded by  the  lustral  water,  emblematical  of  the  blood  of  Christ,  of 
tlve  power  and  mercy  which  can  cleanse  the  stains  of  the  conscience, 
"  Thou  shall  sj:  -inkle  me,  O  Lord,  with  hyssop,  and  I  shall  be  cleans- 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    BELIOION.  S243 

ed  ,  thou  shalt  wash  me,  and  I  shall  be  made  whiter  than  snow.**  Da« 
vid  also  said,  "Thou  shalt  sprinkle  me,  0  Lord,  with  hyssop,  and  I 
shall  be  cleansed ;  thou  shalt  wash  me,  and  I  shall  be  made  whiter 
than  snow."  The  Catholics  have  nuns ;  so  had  the  Jews  nuns,  like 
the  prophetess  Ann,  who  for  "four  score  and  four  years  departed  not 
from  the  temple,  by  fastings  and  prayers  during  night  and  dfiy,''^  Luke, 
xi.  36,  37.  It  is  thus  that  his  parallel  crumbles !  Lateinos  is  not 
the  name  of  the  Catholic  church.  The  title  that,  the  pope  assumes  is 
"»crpus  servorum  Dei,''*  servant  of  the  servants  of  God.  The  name 
of  Luther,  Dioclesian,  Julian,  of  the  true  God,  himself,  could  be  made 
to  tally  with  the  numbers  666 — see  Robinson's  Calmet,  p.  71.  I 
could  take  letters  out  of  the  name  of  Alexander  Campbell  to  mean 
the  same  thing. 

Mr.  Campbell. — ^If  you  can,  I  will  give  up  the  argument.  (A 
laugh). 

Bishop  Purcell. — What  language  must  it  be  ?  Hebrew,  Syriac, 
Greek,  Latin  or  English!  No  matter.  E  is  in  some  languages^ 
300— L  is  50. — 

Mr.  Campbell. — ^You  have  not  yet  learned  the  numeral  alphabet. 

Bishop  Purcell. — I  cannot  make  the  sum  right  off,  but  have  a 
little  patience  with  me  and  I  will  pay  you  all.  (A  laugh. — ^The  au- 
dience having  composed  themselves  at  the  request  of  the  Moderators, 
Bishop  Purcell  proceeded.)  Thus,  you  see,  my  friends,  the  name  of 
my  friend  helps  us  m  this  matter,  for  it  is  the  name  of  a  man,  and  the 
name  of  a  beast,  too,  with  a  hunch  on  its  back,  when  we  can  find  the 
lacking  numerals  to  decipher  him.  He  has  made  a  certain  admission, 
after  having  denied  it  all  the  week,  that  the  apostles  founded  the  see 
of  Rome.  This  shows  that  the  truth  will  prevail,  and  that  my  friend 
will  laugh  in  his  sleeve  at  you,  if  you  believe  all  his  fanciful  and  ro- 
mancing conjectures  about  the  man  of  sin.  Again — another  contra- 
diction. If  all  that  blood  is  to  be  shed,  in  the  exarchate  of  Raven 
na,  we  are  here,  in  Ohio,  and  safe  enough  from  the  danger  under  oui 
happy  constitution. — We  need  have  no  fear  of  being  crushed  beneath 
the  fragments  of  that  crazy  and  tottering  chair,  the  pope  is  sitting  in 
so  uneasily ;  the  very  rumblings  of  the  volcanic  hills  will  die,  and 
their  last  echoes  be  inaudible  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic,  and  as 
the  Apocalyptic  magician  has  pointed  his  wand,  to  the  dilapidated 
jaws  of  the  Beast,  the  conclusion  is  plain,  that,  as  he  has  lost  all  hia 
teeth,  he  can^t  bite  !  we  need  not  be  afraid  of  him. 

We  are  told  the  pope  suffers  himself  to  be  adored,  and  calls  him- 
self God.  So  far  from  this,  we  have  seen  how  he  humbles  himself  be- 
fore the  altar,  how  he  prays  the  humblest  of  the  saints  to  pray  for  him 
to  God,  and  how  he  has  had  a  prayer  inscribed  in  our  church  liturgy, 
whereby  we  ask  of  God  to  preserve  him  from  all  evil,  especially  from 
the  worst  of  all  evils,  sin.  Does  this  look  like  exalting  himself  above 
every  thing  that  is  called  God  1  The  present  pope  is  said  to  be  one 
of  the  best  of  men.  The  only  faults  alleged  against  him  are  that  he  gives 
employment  to  a  large  number  of  poor  tradesmen,  rebuilding  the 
burned  church  of  St.  Paul — and  that  he  /oAes  sn«^  somewhat  profuse- 
ly.    I  wish  every  one  here  had  as  little  to  answer  for. 

Much  has  been  said  about  the  gold  and  silver  of  the  Vatican.  My 
friend,  I  am  sure,  knows  that  money  is  a  necessary  evil.  If  we  all  had 
a  little  more  of  it,  we  might  purchase  heaven  with  the  mammon  of  ini- 
quity; but  the  pope  is  now  poor.     If  I  am  rightly  informed,  his  trea" 


24-t  DEBATE    ON    THE 

sury  is  drained.  He  has  fortunately,  or  unfortunately,  lost  this  mark 
of  the  beast,  if  it  be  one.  But  my  worthy  opponent  has  overlooked 
this  remarkable  fact.  Judea  abounded  in  gold ;  St.  Peter's,  in  Rome, 
was  never  covered  all  over,  like  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  with  plates 
of  gold.  When  Titus  besieged  Jerusalem,  the  Jews  swallowed  their 
gold  to  hide  it  from  their  rapacious  conquerors — and  this  was  made  a 
new  incident  in  the  dreadful  vengeance  of  heaven  upon  that  deicidal 
people,  for  the  soldiers,  in  quest  of  gold,  ripped  open  the  bodies  of 
the  ill-fated  victims  whom  famine,  or  the  arrow,  had  precipitated  from 
the  ramparts.  After  the  sacking  of  Jerusalem,  so  great  was  the  quan- 
tity of  gold  obtained  in  it,  that  gold  fell,  in  sterling  value,  throughou 
the  Roman  empire.  This  would  prove,  that  Jerusalem  was  the  beast. 
How  vain  are  all  the  gentleman's  eloquent  remarks.  Not  one  of  these 
marks  is  peculiar  to  Rome,  while  many  of  them  are  not  applicable  to 
her  at  a'l.  I  will  say  nothing  about  the  millstone;  it  went  to  the 
bottom,  and  so  did  the  gentleman's  argument. 

My  friends,  I  have  one  or  two  arguments  to  borrow  from  a  very  dis- 
tinguished Catholic  writer.  Dr.  Lingard,  author  of  the  history  of  Eng- 
land. We  shall  see  whether  my  friend  has  any  of  the  symptoms  of 
mania  here  so  graphically  described. 

"  During  the  long-  lapse  of  more  than  fifteen  centuries,  the  visions  of  the  apos- 
tle St.  John  had  been  enveloped  in  the  thickest  obscurity.  At  the  era  of  there- 
formation,  a  strong  ray  of  apocalyptic  light  dissipated  the  clouds  which  poperj 
had  raised:  and  since  that  period  every  old  woman,  of  either  gender,  has  been 
able  to  unravel  with  ease  the  web  of  uivstery,  and  to  reveal  to  the  world  the 
true  meaning  of  the  book  of  Revelations.  From  the  days  of  Luther  to  the  pres- 
ent, we  have  possessed  a  numerous  and  uninterrupted  succession  of  translators, 
lecturers,  expositors,  and  annotators,  who  may  truly  be  said  to  have  seen  vis- 
ions, and  to  have  dreamed  dreams;  and,  lest  by  some  mishap  the  pious  race 
should  become  extinct,  Bishop  Warburton  has  left  a  fund  for  the  support  or  the 
reward  of  the  more  fiery  among  its  members.*  I  may  admire  his  zeal,  but  not 
his  wisdom.  He  probably  did  not  see  that  he  was  thus  endeavoring  to  diffuse 
and  perpetuate  an  alarmmg  species  of  intellectual  disease,  which,  for  the  sake 
of  distinction,  I  shall  beg  leave  to  call  the  apocalyptic  mania.  It  has  not,  indeed, 
been  hitherto  classed  in  any  system  of  nosology- j  but  it  is  not  on  that  account 
less  real,  or  less  general ;  and,  I  trust,  I  shall  confer  a  benefit  on  the  public  by 
proceeding  to  point  out  the  origin,  and  to  describe  the  symptoms  of  this  the- 
ological malady. 

When  "  the  magnanimous  fathers  of  the  reformation"  broke  from  the  com- 
munion of  the  Catholic  church,  they  found  it  convenient  to  justify  their  schism, 
by  pleading  that  the  Pope  was  Antichrist,  and  Rome  the  scarlet  w—— of 
Babylon.  This  doctrine,  while  it  inflamed  the  bigotry,  flattered  the  spiritual 
pride  of  their  disciples;  with  conscious  superiority  of  birth,  they  sought  in  the 
apocalypse  for  proof  of  the  ignominious  descent  of  their  opponents,  and  their 
sacrilegious  familiarity  with  the  mysterious  volume,  quickly  produced  the 
disease,  which  is  the  -subject  of  the  present  observations.  Its  progress  was 
rapid.  It  soon  pervaded  every  department  in  life:  but  its  most  distinguish 
ed  victims  were,  and  still  are,  chosen  from  among  those  churchmen,  who. 
from  the  instructions  of  the  nursery  or  the  university,  have  imbibed  a  lively 
dread  jf  the  horrors  of  popery.  The  mania  first  manifests  itself  by  a  restless 
anxiety  respecting  the  future  fortunes  of  the  church,  and  a  strong  attachment  to 

Erophetic  hieroglyphics:  the  antichrist,  and  the  man  of  sin;  the  beast  with  ten 
orns,  and  the  beast  with  two  horns;  the  armies  of  Gog  and  Magog;  the  fall  of 
Babylon,  and  the  arrival  of  the  millennium,  become  the  favorite,  the  only  sub 
ject's  of  study;  false  and  ridiculous  perceptions  anmse  the  imagination;  the 
judgment  is  gradually  enfeebled,  and,  at  last,  the  most  powerful  minds  sink  into 
the  imbecility  of  childhood.     Of  the  truth  of  this  description  we  have  a  nielan 


•  Aofordin?  to  his  'vill,  an  annual  sermon  is  preached  in  Lincoln's  Inn  Chipel,  Jo  prove 
he  Pope  to  b«  Antichrist,  &c.  &c. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    EELIGION.  245 

cholj  proof  in  the  great  Sir  Isaac  Newton.  To  him  Nature  seemed  to  have  un- 
locked her  choicest  secrets:  as  a  philosopher  he  was  and  is  still  unrivalled:  but 
no  sooner  did  he  direct  his  telescope  iroui  the  motions  of  the  heavenly  bodies 
to  the  visions  in  the  apocalypse,  than  his  liead  grew  dizzy,  the  downfall  of  pope- 
ry danced  before  his  eyes,  and  he  hazarded  predictions  which  on  the  scale  ot 
prophets,  have  placed  him  far  beneath  the  well  known  Francis  Moore,  physician 
and  almanac-maker. 

It  shoJld  be  observed,  that  this  intellectual  malady,  like  the  other  species  of 
mania,  assumes  a  thousand  ditl'erent  siiapes,  according  to  the  predispositions  of 
the  subject  which  it  attacks.  I  shall  produce  a  few  instances.  In  1789,  Mr. 
Cook  published  a  translation  of  the  apocalypse,  with  keys  to  open  its  meaning 
to  his  readers.  This  reverend  gentleman  was  Greek  professor  in  the  universi- 
ty at  Cambridge;  and,  as  his  reading  naturally  led  him  to  the  Greek  poets,  he 
was  dettt'inined  that  the  author  of  the  apocalypse  should  be  a  poet,  and,  more- 
over, the  rival  of  Sophocles.  In  his  opinion,  the  apocalypse  is  a  tragedy  form- 
ed on  the  same  plan  as  the  Qlldipus  Tyrannus.  "Tliedranid  opens  with' the 
temple  scene;  the  seals,  the  trumpet,  and  the  vials  unfold  the  plot;  and  though 
the  antichrist  does  not  die,  no  more  than  ffidipus,  yet  he  falls  into  such  calami- 
ty as  makes  him  an  object  of  pity,  and  justices  the  lamentations  pronounced  ou 
his  downfall."  Nor  is  this  all.  By  trying  one  of  his  apocalyptic  keys  on  the 
Odyssey  of  Homer,  he  has  discovered  that  poem  also  to  have  been  inspired,  and 
informs  us  that  the  suitors  of  Penelope  represent  the  vassals  of  poperv,  who,  un- 
der the  pretence  of  courting  the  bride,  the  christian  church,  devour  all  the  good 
things  in  her  house,  till  Christ,  the  true  Ulysses,  the  »J««  ''"t  or  safe  way,  ar- 
rives, and  wreaks  his  vengeance  on  them. 

In  Mr.  Granville  Sharp,  the  favorite  apocalyptic  Nostradamus  of  the  Rector 
of  Newnton  Longville,  (Le  Mess  reply,  p.  193,  202,)  the  mania  has  shewn  itself 
in  a  ditferent  manner.  This  gentleman  is  known  to  be  singularly  partial  to  mo- 
nosyllables. He  has  Written  a  volume  on  tiie  Hebrew  letter  van,  and  another  on 
the  Greek  articles,  o,  ii,  to.  From  letters  and  articles,  he  was  induced,  by  hia 
previous  success  and  the  importunity  of  his  friends  to  proceed  to  the  explica- 
tion of  the  visions  in  the  book  of  Revelations.  Here  the  apocalyptic  mania  soon 
discovered  itself:  but  the  appearance  of  the  disease  was  modified  by  his  pre- 
vious habits  of  monosyllabic  investigation.  He  convinced  himself  that  the  name 
of  the  beast  was  Lateinos,  and  that  Lateinos  must  signify  the  Latin  church.    The 

f)roof  is  curious.  Lateinos,  he  contends,  is  derived  from  the  Hebrew  monosyl- 
able  LAT,  which  means  to  cover  or  conceal.  Now  the  Latin  church,  in  the 
celebration  of  the  mass,  conceals  some  of  the  prayers  from  the  people,  by  order- 
ing them  to  be  pronounced  with  a  low  voice:  therefore  the  Latin  church  is  La- 
teinos, the  beast  in  the  apocalypse.  Moreover  the  head  of  the  Latin  church  resides 
in  the  palace  of  the  Lateran,  a  name  derived  from  the  same  monosyllable  L.\T: 
and  the  Lateran  palace  is  situated  in  the  country  anciently  called  Latium,an  ap- 
pellation also  derived  from  the  same  monosyllable  Lat:  and  Latium  is  a  province 
of  that  part  of  Furope  called  Italy,  which  «lso  derives  its  name  from  the  same 
monosyllable  LAT.  Be  not  startled,  gentle  reader:  apocalyptic  maniacs  can 
with  equal  facility  read  backwards  or  forwards;  and  Mr.  Sharp  informs  us,  that, 
if  we  read  Italy  backwards,  we  shall  have  Ylati,  in  the  midst  of  which  is  the  He- 
brew monosyllable  L.\T.     Naviget  Anticyram! 

Were  I  to  describe  all  the  varieties  ot  the  disease,  these  observations  would 
swell  to  an  unmeasurable  bulk.  I  shall  therefore  content  myself  with  noticing 
the  prophetic,  which  is  perhaps  the  most  prevalent,  species.  When  the  mind  la 
seized  with  this  mania,  the  regions  of  futurity  are  instantly  opened  to  its  sight:  it 
can  point  out  the  date  and  nature  of  every  event  which  is  to  happen;  it  can  in- 
form us  in  what  year  popery,  Mohammed  ism,  and  infidelity  are  to  perish;  when 
and  where  antichrist  is  to  be  born,  reign,  and  die:  who  is  to  restore  the  Holy 
Land  to  the  Jews;  and  in  what  year  the  new  Jerusalem  is  to  descend  from  heaven. 
It  is  in  vain  that  preceding  prophets  have  frequently  outlived  their  own  predic- 
tions: tiie  lessons  of  experience  are  heard  with  contempt:  and  eatch  new  seer  is 
convinced  of  the  truth  of  his  own  visions.  Among  those  who  have  suffered  late- 
ly under  this  form  of  the  disease,  the  most  distinguished  are  Mr.  Whitaker  and 
Mr.  Faber,  both  scholars  of  extensive  erudition,  and  both  equally  animated 
against  the  Church  of  Rome.  They  both  agree  that  Luther  is  the  angel  wi  h  the 
everlasting  gospel;  and,  if  by  his  gospel  they  mean  the  solifidian  doctrine  -Jrea- 
dy  noticed,  they  have  a  chance  to  be  right.  It  may  justly  be  called  everlasting 
V  2 


246  DEBATE    ON    THE 

for  it  will  probably  find  proselytes  as  long  as  man  shall  dwell  on  the  e?rth.  Mr. 
Whitaker  discovers  that  the  two  horns  ot  the  beast  are  the  two  monastic  orders 
of  the  Dominicans  and  Franciscans.  Why  they  should  claim  the  oreference  be- 
fore their  brethren,  of  greater  antiquity,  or  more  general  difl'usioi  I  know  not; 
but  it  is  certainly  unfortunate  that  the  beast  has  not  four  horns  then  vou,  ye 
sons  of  Benedict  and  Loyola,  might  have  had  the  honor  of  being  seatecf  on  tne 
remaining  two.  The  same  gentleman  informs  us  that  the  Ottoman  empire  will 
soon  fall,  Rome  be  wrested  from  the  pope,  and  the  seat  of  the  papacy  he  trans- 
ferred to  Jerusalem.  Mr.  Faber  makes  an  equal  display  of  erudition;  but  the 
third  angel,  Mr.  Whitaker's  Zuingle.he  has  placed  in  a  most  uncomfortable  situa- 
tion: he  has  bound  him  fast  in  the  midst  of  the  ocean,  and  transformed  him  into 
the  insular  church  of  England!  Nor  does  he  always  a^ree  with  his  rival  iu  more 
important  points.  The  two  beasts  he  shews  to  be  the  two  contemporary  Ro- 
man empires,  temporal  and  spiritual,  under  the  emperors  and  the  ptipes:  and 
gives  his  readers  the  pleasing  intelligence,  that  both  tne  Turk  and  the  Pope  will 
expire  in  the  year  1868.  Though  he  does  not  expect  to  witness  this  happy  event 
himself,  yet  he  has  the  goodness  to  promise  a  sight  of  it  to  maby  of  the  present 
generation: 

TX.IITI,  ?«Xot,  XXI  ftiivxV  i-Bi  Xfovov,  09; a  $aai/t>i> 
£i  tTtov  X*\x*i  fixvTSvfTeti,  if>  xxi  vxi. 

Unfortunately  for  these  two  prophets,  each  disputed  the  accuracy  of  the  pre- 
dictions of  his  rival:  an  animated  controversy  followed;  and  the  result  has  been 
a  conviction  in  the  minds  of  most  of  their  readers,  that  each  has  completely  suc- 
ceeded in  demolishing  the  system  of  his  adversary,  and  completely  failed  in  estab- 
lishing his  own. 

Thus  have  I  attempted  to  describe  the  different  symptoms  of  this  disease;  but 
I  hope  I  shall  be  excused  from  indicating  the  method  of  cure.  When  the  mania 
has  once  obtainei  possession  of  the  brain,  1  doubt  whether  three  Anticyne  would 
be  sufficient  to  expel  it.  I  would  rather,  like  Dr.  Trotter  in  his  treatise  on  the 
nervous  temperament,  endeavor  to  correct  that  predisposition  which  natu- 
rally leads  to  it.  I  would  advise  the  Protestant  theologian  to  suspend,  for  a  while 
at  least,  his  assent  to  some  of  those  doctrines,  which  education  has  taught  him 
to  revere  as  sacred.  I  would  have  him  learn  to  doubt  whether  it  be  certain,  that 
a  long  succession  of  bishops,  through  many  centuries,  can  be  that  one  individual 
described  by  St.  Paul  as  the  man  of  sin:  or  that  the  church,  from  which  almost 
all  other  churches  have  received  the  knowledge  of  the  gospel  is,  "the  great 
mother  of  harlots,"  and  the  kingdom  of  Antichrist.  I  would  recommend  to  him, 
If  he  must  decipher  the  apocalyptic  hieroglyphics,  to  attend  to  the  solemn  assev- 
eration of  their  author,  wnich  is  frequently  repeated  both  in  the  first  and  the  last 
chapters,  that  his  predictions  were,  even  at  the  time  in  which  he  wrote,  on  the 
point  of  being  fulfilled.  In  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  first  period  of 
the  christian  history,  he  may  find  enough  to  exercise  his  ingenuity, and  may  per- 
haps stumble  on  the  only  clue  which  can  lead  to  the  solution  of  the  difhculties 
contained  in  this  mysterious  volume.  I  am  aware  that  what  I  ask,  will  not  readily 
be  granted  to  me.  The  doctrine  that  popery  is  the  beast,  the  pope  antichrist, 
and  christian  Rome  the  whore  of  Babylon,  is,  I  know,  an  important  part  of  the 
new  gospel  preached  by  Luther  and  his  associates:  it  forms,  to  use  the  words  of  a 
learned  prelate,*  "  a  primary  pillar  of  the  reformed  faith."  But  when  I  con- 
sider the  dangerous  consequences  of  this  doctrine,  its  deleterious  effects  on  the 
judg^uent  of  some  among  the  n^st  distinguished  writers  of  the  Protestant  com- 
munion, the  ridicule  which  it  serves  to  throw  on  the  inspired  writings,  and  the 
handle  which  it  gives  to  the  sneers  and  contempt  of  the  professed  infidel,  T  in- 
dulge a  well-founded  hope  that,  for  the  sake  of  religion  and  humanity,  it  will 
meet  with  little  support  from  the  enlightened  characters,  who  now  preside  in 
the  established  church.  If  it  once  formed  a  pillar  of  the  reformation,  I  conceive 
it  could  only  be  a  temporary  support,  which  may  now  be  removed  without  dan- 
ger to  the  fabric.  To  the  pious  fraud,  from  its  utility,  the  first  reformers  might 
easily  reconcile  their  consciences;  at  the  present  day  it  may  be  rejected  by  their 
successors  with  some  credit:  it  cannot  be  retained  without  disgrace. 

•  Watson's  Theological  Tract*,  vol.  v.  p.  7. 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  247 

Half-past  11  o'cloc]c,A,  M. 
Ma.  Campbell  rises —  \ 

The  bishop  has  not  given  one  but  many  and  various  proofs  of  the 
truth  of  an  adage  of  some  currency  and  authority.  Napoleon  in  his 
flight  from  Moscow,  musing  on  recent  disasters,  often  uttered  this  ex- 
pression: "There  is  but  one  short  step  ftom  the  sublime  to  the  ridicu- 
lous," I  never  before  witnessed  so  illustrious  a  proof  of  the  invin- 
cible force  of  the  argument  from  prophecy.  I  looked  at  the  gentle- 
man writhing  under  the  accumulating  evidence,  amounting  almost  to 
demonstration,  that  I  had  asserted  no  defamation  in  my  fourth  propo- 
sition. Instead  of  meeting  the  subject  with  scripture  and  argument, 
like  the  scuttle  fish,  he  darkens  the  waters  that  he  may  escape  the 
eye  and  the  han4  of  his  pursuer.  His  effort  at  mystification  is  as 
ridiculous  as  it  is  imbecile.  He  invokes  the  assistance  of  some  old 
lady  to  create  a  laugh  ;  but  the  audience  has  got  tired  laughing  at  his 
manoeuvres.  The  subject  is  two  grave,  and  the  audience  too  deeply 
penetrated  with  the  awful  truth  which  they  had  just  heard  to  be  amus- 
ed by  such  levity.  Failing  so  manifestly,  in  the  attempt  to  disparage 
all  use  of  the  prophecies,  he  undertakes  to  explain.  He  is  driven 
into  Asia  to  the  Koran,  and  to  Mecca  for  the  man  of  sin  !  How  have 
the  weapons  of  war  perished  I  Facts  are  not  found  in  the  history  of 
Mahomet  or  Mahometanism,  to  explain  these  prophecies :  and  conscious 
of  this,  his  own  courage  fails,  and  a  second  time  he  resorts  to  ridicule. 
As  Voltaire,  Volney,  and  other  wits,  have  fruitlessly  attempted  to 
laugh  Christianity  out  of  countenance,  he  endeavors  to  place  the  whole 
matter  before  you  as  idle  and  absurd.  Could  my  rhetorical  and  ingen- 
ious opponent  afford  more  unequivocal  manifestations  of  confusion  and 
dismay,  than  you  have  now  witnessed  ?  But,  my  friends,  we  are  not 
to  be  laughed  out  of  our  argument,  that  stands  before  us  like  the  rock 
of  Gibraltar.  The  waves  that  strike  it,  but  foam  out  their  imbecility, 
and  are  broken  to  pieces.  He  may,  indeed,  torture  his  ingenuity  to 
escape  from  an  argument,  which  he  dare  not,  which  he  cannot  meet ; 
hut  he  will  torture  it  in  vain. 

The  effort  of  my  opponent  has  been  as  much  to  disparage  prophecy 
itself,  as  any  mode  of  interpreting  it.  According  to  him,  prophecy 
is  no  gift;  On  our  principles,  it  is  at  least  as  useful  and  interesting 
as  history.  It  is  one  of  the  kindest  boons  of  heaven,  that  we  are  per- 
mitted sometimes  to  peep  into  the  future,  guided  by  the  lamp  of  eter- 
nity. The  whole  Bible,  is  for  the  most  part,  history  and  prophecy. 
It  is  almost  all  history,  for  prophecy  is  the  history  of  the  future.  God 
never  held  the  human  family  in  suspense  respecting  their  vital  inter- 
ests. Their  origin,  duty,  and  destiny,  he  has  equally  regarded  in  all 
his  communications.  Soon  as  our  first  parents  had  transgressed  in 
Eden,  he  permitted  not  one  sun  to  go  down,  till  he  appeared  to  thei 
and  revealed  a  portion  of  his  purposes.  In  a  single  period  he  con- 
denses a  miniature  view  of  the  future  destinies  of  mankind  :  "  I  will 
place  enmity,"  said  he  to  the  serpent,  "  between  thy  seed  and  her 
seed  :  it  shall  bruise  thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel."  I 
thank  our  Heavenly  Father,  that  he  has  thus  from  the  beginning  vouch- 
safed to  his  children  something  of  the  future.  Indeed,  so  abundant 
are  his  revelations,  his  promises  which  are  all  prophecies,  and  his 
prophecies  which  all  threaten  or  promise,  that  there  is  scarce  a  single 
page  of  the  whole  Bible  without  a  prophecy  inscribed  upon  it.     Cer- 


248  »EBATE    ON    THE 

tainly  my  opponent  has  forgotten  this !  Has  he  not,  according  to  his 
ability,  been  turning  into  ridicule  prophecy  itself,  the  Bible  itself 
God's  good  and  perfect  gift?  But  if  prophecy  be  wholly  unintelli- 
gible ;  Why,  I  ask,  should  it  constitute  so  large  a  portion  of  God's 
only  book  to  man  1  But  I  will  not  farther  debate  this  question.  The 
gentleman  himself  would  admit  all  this,  on  any  other  occasion. 

I  did  not  intend,  indeed,  and  I  am  sorry  I  proposed,  an  argument  of 
this  kind  before  such  an  assembly,  limited  as  I  am  at  present  to  an 
hour  or  two,  at  most  to  complete  it.  If  my  opponent  would  devote 
with  me  a  day  or  two  to  this  subject,  I  might  even  satisfy  himself, 
not  only  that  prophecy  is  a  gift,  an  intelligent  gift ;  but  that  much  of 
it  pertains  to  the  origin,  progress,  and  catastrophe  of  that  very  hierar- 
chy, of  which  he  is  himself  a  member. 

There  are  two  kinds  of  maps  in  schools ;  one  gives  both  the  place 
and  the  name  of  it,  the  other  (sometimes  called  a  blank  map,)  gives 
the  place  without  the  name.  The  former  represents  history  ;  the  lat- 
ter, prophecy.  Prophecy  is  as  correct  a  map  of  the  future,  as  histo- 
T}'  is  of  the  past ;  but  it  is  not  always  quite  so  obvious.  I  have  taught 
geography  with  these  two  sorts  of  maps.  The  pupil  studied  on  that 
inscribed  with  the  names  of  the  places,  and  we  examined  him  on  the 
blank  map.  The  study  of  fulfilled  prophecy,  with  the  history  of  the 
past,  prepares  us  for  the  blank  map,  the  outline  of  the  future.  On 
the  blank  map,  we  can  learn  the  great  outline  of  things — their  rela 
tive  positions,  distances  and  magnitudes.  We  may  sometimes  err,  in 
fixing  the  proper  name  on  every  place :  but  we  cannot  greatly  err,  in 
forming  a  useful  acquaintance  with  the  whole  ;  especially,  having  a 
correct  knowledge  of  what  is  past,  or  of  certain  portions  of  the  past, 
which  must  ever  be  a  key  to  the  future.  Thus  we  can  acquire  a  clear 
and  satisfactory  outline  of  the  vast  expanse  of  future  time,  although 
we  may,  sometimes,  err  in  a  date,  or  in  the  name  of  a  particular  place, 
person,  or  thing. 

But  as  my  opponent  has  so  perfectly  failed  to  meet  my  argument; 
I  shall  have  to  give  it  to  the  public  without  much  amplification  or 
proof.  ■  I  will,  therefore,  recapitulate,  emphatically,  a  few  of  the 
grand  land  marks  ;  and 

1.  The  two  tyrannies  mentioned  in  Daniel  and  .Tohn,  arose  out  of 
the  great  sea,  the  Mediterranean  ;  or,  from  among  the  nations  border- 
ing thereon,  in  a  state  of  tumult.  Does  not  Rome  stand  on  these  wa- 
ters ;  and  is  not  Italy  almost  surrounded  by  them  ?  The  Tiber  itself, 
inconsiderable  as  it  is,  is  nevertheless,  a  part  of  this  very  sea.  This 
beast  came  not  from  the  deserts  of  Arabia ;  nor  from  the  Pacific,  nor 
the  Atlantic  ;  but  from  the  Mediterranean. 

2.  The  origin  or  commencement  of  these  two  despotisms,  or  of  the 
ymbolic  beasts  of  Daniel  and  John,  exactly  synchronize.    They  were 

contemporaries :  indeed,  they  are  identical.  They  both  rise  at  the 
same  time  and  place. 

3.  They  are  co-existent,  and  continue  the  same  time,  1260  years. 

4.  The  types,  in  both  pictures,  or  the  grand  incidents  and  charac- 
teristics, are  the  same. 

5.  Their  latter  end  is  the  same.  There  is,  indeed,  no  argument  on 
this  subject:  it  is  as  plain  as  history.  My  opponent  will  never  debate 
it.  Paul  occupies  the  place  of  a  commentator  or  interpretator,  and 
without  a  figure  explains  the  mystery  of  iniquity.  He  avers  the  im- 
possibility of  the  appearance  of  this  monster,  this  papal  hierarchy,  so 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  2'i9 

long  as  pagan  Rome,  which  then  hindered  a  pope,  should  continue  to 
hinder.  All  commentators  understand,  "  he  that  lets,"  as  referring  to 
pagan  Rome.  We  have  already  seen,  that  we  could  not  find  a  pope 
before  the  time  of  Phocas  the  usurper,  and  Boniface  III.  No  politico- 
ecclesiastic  communion  of  nations,  under  a  ghostly  monarchy,  ever 
stood  on  earth  before  that  day. 

Paul  speaks  of  the  temple  of  God,  as  the  residence  of  this  mammoth 
antagonist  power.  It  was  not  in  a  pure  church  he  appeared,  and,  cer- 
tainly it  was  not  among  the  pagan  Arabs,  that  this  man  of  idolatry  (for 
such  is  the  import  of  sin  in  this  passage)  showed  his  blasphemous  face. 

I  said  not,  that  there  was  no  church  of  God  at  Rome,  before  the  pa- 
pacy. If  there  never  had  been  a  true  church  of  God,  at  Rome ;  the  papacy, 
or  the  man  of  sin,  never  could  have  been  born  there.  For,  be  it  ob- 
served, emphatically,  the  man  of  sin  is  not  a  pagan,  a  Turk,  a  pro- 
fessed infidel ;  but,  an  apostate  Christian. 

Does  not  the  pope  of  Rome,  and  none  but  the  pope  of  Rome,  fill  up 
all  the  grand  lineaments  of  this  painting?  He  exalts  himself  above 
all  that  is  called  a  god — a  magistrate,  a  pagan  god  ;  nay,  above  God 
himself:  for  no  false  God,  nor  the  only  living  and  true  God,  proposed 
to  forgive  sins  before  they  were  committed  !  His  name  is  covered 
with  blasphemy.  There  never  stood  on  earth  such  a  monster;  look- 
ing like  a  lamb,  and  speaking  like  a  dragon.  I  need  not,  however, 
repeat  what  has  not  been  contradicted. 

My  argument  is  unanswered.  I  regret  that  it  must  go  to  the  public, 
without  being  more  fully  tested.  As  to  Lateinos,  the  gentleman  may 
laugh  at  it ;  but  can  he  show  state  or  empire,  whose  name  like  that  of 
He  Latine  Basikia,  will  spell  666  ?  If  he  cannot,  this  alone  ought  to 
check  his  opposition. 

My  opponent  did  me  great  honor,  in  giving  me  such  a  colleague  as 
Sir  Isaac  Newton,  to  bear  half  the  brunt  of  his  indignation.  Greater 
literary  and  ecclesiastic  names,  than  that  of  this  great  philosopher,  and 
brighter  stars  in  universal  knowledge,  adorn  those  prophetic  heavens, 
and  concentrate  their  light  upon  this  map,  which  I  have  traced  so  hastily 
and  imperfectly.  What,  if  I  should  let  the  gentleman  see  a  star  of  the 
first  magnitude,  or  hear  an  archdeacon,  in  his  own  church,  say  a  word 
on  Babylon,  and  on  the  woman  that  sits  on  many  waters ! 

"  Who  can  there  safely  live,  where  not  only  wicked  things  are  lawful,  but  all 
men  are  conipplled  by  the  severest  punishments  to  believe,  speak,  and  follow  the 
most  wicked  and  ungodly  things;  and  to  embrace  them  as  things  just  and  lauda- 
ble; where  they  do  not  only  not  receive  sound  doctrine,  but  bitterly  persecute 
all  those  who  do  resist  the  madness  of  their  wills  ?  «  *  » 

*  What  is  it,  think  you,  to  be  drunk  with  the  cup  of  Babylon,  but  froni 

'  long  conversation  with  her  to  be  so  infected  with  the  contagion  of  her,  that,  fol- 
lowing the  erring  herd,  you  wiliingiy  embrace  false  things  for  true;  perverse  for 
righteous,  mad  things  for  sound  :  and  to  desire  rather  to  be  mad  with  the  multi- 
tude, than  to  be  wise  alone  with  danger  and  derision?  He  that  is  different  in  man- 
ners froni  them,  ought  not  to  live  there,  where  the  plague  of  corruption  hath  sq 
prevailed  as  to  infect  all  men  with  its  contagion."  ^icliolaus  de  Clemaugia. 
Epist.  p.  177. 

In  his  book  of  Simontacal  Prelates,  he  says,  cap.  1* 

"The  church  is  now  become  a  shop  of  merchandize,  or  rather  of  robbery  and 
rapine;  in  which  all  the  sacraments  are  exposed  to  sale.  •  *  And 

\herefore,  vou  see  such  men  admitted  to  the  priesthood  and  other  holy  orders, 
who  are  icfiots,  unlearned,  and  scarce  able  to  read,  though  waywardly,  and  with- 
out understanding  one  svllable  after  another,  who  know  no  more  Latin,  that, 
they  do  Arabic,  vviio,  wfien  they  read,  pray,  or  sing,  know  not,  whether  they 
bless  God  or  blaspheme  him — men  undisciplined,  unquiet,  gluttons,  drunkards 

32 


250  DEBATE    OX    THE 

praters,  va^bonds,  lustful,  bred  up  in  luxury,  aud  in  one  word,  idle  and  ignorant." 

Id  his  book  of  the  corrupt  state  of  the  church,  cap.  3. 

"That  she  was  defiled  with  the  sink  of  all  vices;  and  might  be  fitly  called  the 
church  of  JMalignants;  that  the  saying  of  the  prophet  was  now  verified,  that 
from  the  least  of  them  to  the  greatest,  every  one  was  given  to  covetousness;  that 
from  the  prophet  to  the  priest,  every  one  dealt  falsely.  *  «  »         • 

Who  preaches  or  declares  the  gospel?   Who  either  by  word  or  deed  shews  the 
way  to  life  eternal?" 

A^in : 

"  What  should  I  speak,  (saith  he)  of  the  learning  of  the  priests,  when  it  is  visible 
that  scarce  any  of  them  can  read?  They  know  not  words,  aud  much  less  things: 
he  of  them  that  prayeth,  is  a  barbarian  to  himself.  If  any  man  is  idle  tmd  ab- 
hors labor,  if  he  loves  luxury,  he  gets  now-a-da_vs  into  the  clergy,  and  then 
presently  he  joins  himself  to  the  rest  of  the  priests  that  are  voluptuous,  and  live 
according  to  Epicurus,  rather  than  according  to  the  laws  of  Christ.     Cap.  25. 

"  Such  (saith  he)  is  the  abundance  of  wicked  men  in  all  professions,  that  there 
is  scarcely  one  among  a  thousand,  who  sincerely  doth  what  his  profession  doth 
require;  if  there  be  any  sincere,  chaste,  sober,  frugal  person,  in  any  college  or 
convent,  who  doth  not  walk  in  the  broad  way,  he  is  made  a  ridiculous  fable  to  the 
rest,  and  is  continually  called  insolent,  mad,  and  hypocritical  fellow;  so  that 
many  who  would  have  been  good,  had  they  lived  with  good  and  honest  men, 
are  drawn  by  wicked  company  into  their  vices,  lest  they  should  suffer  the  fore- 
mentioned  reproaches  among  their  companions."     Cap.  26. 

He  tken  concludes  with  an  apostrophe  to  the  Roman  church,  as 
follows  : 

"What  thinkest  thou  of  thine  own  prophecy,  the  Revelations  of  St.  John? 
Dost  thou  not  think  they  do  at  least,  in  part,  belong  to  thee?  Thou  hast  not 
surely  so  wholly  lost  all  shame  as  to  deny  this:  look,  therefore,  into  it,  and  read 
the  damnation  of  this  great  whore,  sitting  vpnnmany  waters,  and  then  contemplaii 
thy  famous  facts  and  future  ruin."     Declarat.  Defect.  Virorum  Eccl. 

So  testifies  Nicolaus  de  Clemaugis,  an  archdeacon  of  the  church  of 
Rome,  in  the  fifteenth  century. 

Not  only  have  the  sins  of  Sodom  and  Egypt  been  multiplied  in  this 
Babylon  the  great,  but  she  had  superadded  to  these  the  blood-guilti- 
ness and  cruelty  of  Jerusalem.  Persecution  is  of  the  very  essence . 
and  spirit  of  the  supremacy,  not  merely  as  the  martyred  millions  of 
Protestants,  of  every  age,  declare  ;  but  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
church,  and  the  oaths  of  her  bishops.  Every  Roman  Catholic  bishop 
is  sworn  to  persecute  heretics  and  schismatics  :  even  this  very  gentle- 
man has  sworn  to  ptrsecute  and  oppose  heretics  and  schismatics  to  the  utmost 
of  his  power.  This  is  no  mere  allegation.  I  will  hereafter  produce 
the  oath,  and  if  it  can  be  otherwise  explained,  I  shall  give  him  an  op- 
portunity to  do  it.  Till  then,  I  proceed  to  allege,  further,  that  learned 
Roman  Catholics  have  tremblingly  interpreted  these  prophecies,  as 
belonging  to  Rome  papal.  I  have  another  witness  here,  in  confirma- 
tion of  my  speech,  and  with  his  testimony  I  shall  close  these  remarks, 
and  proceed. 

"  Whence  is  it  that  this  happened?  to  wit,  because  all  flesh  had  corrupted  its 
ways,  we  were  all  citizens  and  inhabitants  not  of  the  holy  city  Rome,  that 
wicked  city;  of  which  that  of  the  prophet  Isaiah  is  fulfilled,  "How  is  the  faithful 
city  become  aharlot."  Let  no  man  tninkthis  prophecy  has  been  fulfilled  already 
in  the  destruction  of  Babvlon,  or  Jerusalem.  No!  future  things  were  present  to 
the  prophet's  eye,  and  this  the  prophet  hath  declared  to  us,  saying,  '•  the  daugh- 
ter of  Zion  shall  be  left  desolate,  as  in  the  wasting  of  the  enemy.  St.  John 
doth  in  the  Revelations  tell  us,  the  daughter  of  Zion  is  not  Jerusalem,  but  Rome; 
and  his  description  of  her  makes  it  plain:  For  the  woman  which  thou  sawest 
(saith  he)  is  tfiat  great  city  which  hatn  dominion  over  the  kings  of  the  earth, 
that  is  spiritual  dominion.  She  sits,  saith  he,  upon  seven  hills,  which  properly 
agrees  to  Rome,  which  upon  this  account,  is  styled  septicolis.  She  is  full,  saith 
he,    -f  the  names  of  blasphemy — she  if  the  mother  of  uncleanness,  fornications. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  251 

and  abominations,which  are  in  the  earth;  than  which  words,  no  mori  particiilat 
dtmonslralion  of  the  city  cmi  be  requisite,  seeing  these  iniquities  do  almost  gen- 
erally reign,  yet  here  they  have  their  seat  and  empire."  Orat.  habit,  ad  auditore* 
KctaV    Mail  15,  A.  D. 

My  friend  is  again  on  ceUbacy.  But,  really,  I  cannot  return  to 
these  matters  as  often  as  he  chooses  to  explain  away,  or  deny,  or 
otherwise  dispose  of,  his  own  sayings  and  concessions.  In  this  mat- 
ter, as  in  a  hundred  others,  it  might  suffice  to  show,  that  he  differs 
from  both  Peter  and  Paul,  and  all  the  other  apostles.  For,  as  an 
apostle  of  Christ,  Paul  says  of  himself  and  Barnabas,  that  they  had  a 
righl  to  have  wives,  ^^  aisler-^wives,''^  as  well  as  the  other  apostles.  In 
this  way  Paul  proves  the  point :  "  Have  we  not  power  to  lead  about 
with  us  a  wife,  as  the  other  apostles  have  %  Or,  are  Barnabas  and  my- 
self debarred  this  privilege?"  Such  is  the  spirit  and  point  of  that 
passage  ;  and  excepting  in  time  of  public  calamity,  as  Paul  elsewhere 
leaches,  "  Let  every  man  have  his  own  wife,  and  every  woman  her  own 
husband."     So  we  teach. 

The  bishop  owes  an  apology  for  speaking  on  a  subject,  which  I 
did  not  introduce  for  discussion.  The  whole  merits  of  auricular  con- 
fession is  not  the  question  ;  but  the  simple  fact,  that  it  is  a  tenet  of  the 
party,  growing  out  of  a  human  rule  of  divine  faith.  I  introduced  it,  to 
be  admitted  or  denied  ;  not  now  to  be  debated.  The  same  is  true  of 
transubstantiation.  I  introduced  these  institutions,  as  proof  of  the  im- 
moral nature  and  tendency  of  the  Romanist  rule  of  faith.  I  think  it 
almost  enough  to  have  these  doctrines  or  institutions  acknowledged  in 
this  age  and  country,  to  prove  that  Roman  Catholicism  is  not  suscep- 
tible of  reformation ;  and  would  be  the  same  in  this  community  as  in 
Spain,  Italy,  or  Portugal,  uoder  similar  circumstances.  My  friend 
had  the  opportunity  of  a  simple  denial  of  these  items  at  the  moment, 
if  they  were  not  parts  of  his  system ;  and  he  may  have  the  full  dis- 
cussion of  them  again. 

On  the  subject  of  confession,  one  word  as  to  the  quotations  from 
Episcopalians  and  Methodists.  ,  Would  the  gentleman  wish  you  to 
understand,  that  auricular  confession  is  an  ordinance  of  those  religious 
communities,  as  taught  and  practised  in  his  church  1  If  he  does  not, 
where  is  the  relevancy  of  these  quotations  ?  If  he  does,  where  is  the 
truth  and  candor?  "Confess  youi  faults  to  one  another,"  will  justify 
any  two  or  more  persons  mutually  to  confess  to  each  other,  and  to  pray 
for  one  another  ,-  but  will  he  affirm,  that  Methodists  and  Episcopalians 
say  to  one  another,  "  I  absolve  thee,"  at  their  mutual  confessions  1 ! 
Why,  then,  I  ask,  seek  to  make  Episcopalians  and  Methodists  bear  a 
part  of  the  shame  of  these  unscriptural  and  sinful  practices  1  'J'hey 
disavow  them :  they  would  say  to  the  bishop,  confess  your  faults  to 
us,  and  vi  will  confess  to  you ;  but  on  no  other  condition.  We  may 
pray  for  you ;  we  cannot  forgive  you.  You  may  pray  for  us ;  but  you 
cannot  forgive  us.  I  must,  on  this  point,  read  you  another  extract 
fron.  Smith's  Synopsis  of  the  works  of  Ligori,  that  you  may  see  what 
justice  my  opponent  renders  to  Episcopalians  and  Methodists,  in  his 
alliancing  them  with  himself  on  the  subject  of  confession : 

"  The  suint  continues  thus:  St.  Philip  Neiius  used  to  tell  his  penitents,  that 
they  who  desire  to  progress  in  the  way  of  God  should  submit  themselves  to  a 
learned  confcssor,whotu  they  should  obey  as  God.  [Is  this  Methodism?]  He  who 
thus  acts  will  be  secure  from  having  to  render  an  account  of  any  of  his  actions. 
A  confessor  must  be  believed,  because  God  will  not  sutler  him  to  err.  Nothing 
U  safer  than  tu  follow  the  will  of  one's  director,  and  uotbiug  is  more  dangerous 


252  DEBATE    OS   THE 

than  to  be  directed  by  one's  own  judgment.  [Is  this  Epi»copal!anism?j  "  If," 
continues  Ligori,  quoting  from  Giossa,  "  a  coinniandnient  be  doubtful,  he  who 
acts  in  obedience  to  his  confessor  is  excused  from  sin,  although  in  truth,  what 
he  does  is  sinful.""  [Is  this  Methodism?]  Quoting  from  St.  Dionjsius,  he  has 
the  following:  "  If  there  be  a  doubt  whether  what  one  is  about  to  do  is  against 
the  commandment  of  God,  we  must  obey  the  coannandnient  of  our  prelate,"' 
(bishop,  priest  or  confessor,)  "  because,  although  what  we  do  be  against  God 
nevertheless,  on  account  of  the  virtue  of  obedience,  we  being  subject  to  our 
prelates  do  not  sin."     [Is  this  Episcopalianism?] — Id.  ib. 

"Let  the  confessor,"  continues  the  saint,  "strenuously  insist  upon  the  peni- 
.tent's  obeying  him,  and  if  he  refuses  to  obey,  let  him  be  sharply  rebuked,  be 
deprived  of  communion,  and  let  his  obduracy  be  blunted  as  much  a»  possible." — 
Id.  ib.  N.  16.     [Time  expired.] 

Twelve  o'clock,  M. 
Bis  HOP  PURCELL  rises — 

It  was  not  heaven's  holy  oracles,  but  man's  presumptuous  freedom 
with  the  word  of  God,  that  I  ridiculed.  It  was  my  friend  who  ex- 
posed the  holy  record  to  contempt ;  and  afforded  to  infidels  occasion 
for  triumph  and  insult,  by  forcing  upon  it  his  own  preposterous  inter- 
pretations, and  making  it  say  what  its  divine  Author  never  intended  it 
to  say.  I  tell  him  again,  in  the  very  words  of  that  sacred  book,  that 
^'' 110  prophecy  of  scripture  is  of  any  private  interpretation;''''  that  these 
blind  who  are  "  leaders  of  the  blind,"  and  that  "  both  fall  into  the  pit  P^ 
Matthew  xv.  14.  that,  as  Peter  says,  there  are  many  things  in  the  scrip- 
tures which  my  friend  says  are  so  very  plain,  hard  to  be  understood,  which 
the  unlearned  and  unstable  wrest,  as  they  do  also  the  other  scriptures  to 
their  own  destruction  .■  2d  Peter,  ch.  iii.  v.  16;  finally,  that  "as  there 
were  false  prophets  among  the  pettple,  even  so  shall  there  be  lying 
teachers,  who  shall  bring  in  sects  of  perdition,  and  deny  the  Lord  who 
bought  them,  bringing  on  themselves  swift  destruction,  and  many  shall 
follow  their  riotousness,  through  whom  the  way  of  truth  shall  be  evil 
spoken  of."  Having  exposed  the  scriptures,  our  learned  friend  gave 
us  a  smart  lesson  in  geography  and  chronology,  proving,  at  least,  one 
point  to  my  satisfaction,  if  not  to  his  own,  that  we  may  err  in  a  date, 
place,  person,  or  thing,  the  which  he  veritably  hath  done  in  his  sym 
bolical  dissertation.  I  may,  but  I  will  not,  apply  to  him  the  figure  of 
Isaiah,  "  he  has  broken  the  eggs  of  asps,  and  may  eat  them ;  he  hatb 
woven  the  spider's  web,  and  may  clothe  himself  with  the  filmy  tex- 
ture." Isaiah  lix.  5.  The  fragile  egg  and  filmy  texture  are  proper 
emblems  of  fickleness,  inconstancy,  and  change  of  religion ;  but  in 
ours  there  is  neither  mutability  nor  "shadow  of  vicissitude." 

My  friend  has  taken  us  a  fishing  again ;  the  sea  monster  has  dis- 
cclored  the  waters,  and  like  the  wolf  and  lamb  in  the  fable,  he  charges 
upon  me  the  troubling  of  the  stream.  There  is  no  escape  for  the 
gentleman,  ^^  I  absolve  thee"  are  the  very  words  of  the  Episcopalian 
ritual  in  England;  and  private  and  particular  confession  is  practised 
by  the  Methodists  in  the  United  States.  Even  he,  himself,  admits 
that  the  words  "  confess  your  sins  to  one  another,"  will  justify 
(St.  James  and  christians,  ought  to  be  much  obliged  to  him,) 
any  tivo,  or  more,  to  confess  to  one  another !  What,  then,  does  he 
mean  by  denying  and  admitting,  rejecting  and  adopting,  every  creed 
and  practice  alternately  ]  He  blows  hot  and  cold  with  the  same 
breath.  St.  Philip  Nerius  gave  wise  directions  on  the  decalogue, 
and  shewed  that  God,  himself,  could  not  authorize  a  violation  of  his 
own  laws,  much  less  a  confessor.     Hence  his  advice — "  obey  yout 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  253 

ioiifessor  as  God"  was  perfectly  intelligible.  I  wish  my  friend  would 
study  the  saint's  life,  and  he  would  find  in  it  maxims  and  examplea 
well  worthy  of  imitation,  and  nothing  that  could  scandalize  him. 

My  argument  upon  the  subject  of  confession  was  perfectly  pertinent ; 
and  the  gentleman  felt  it — h{7ic  illx  lachrymx, — hence  his  charge  of 
irrelevancy.  It  was  elaborately  argued  by  him,  that  the  practice  was 
immoral,  and  it  behoved  me  to  vindicate  it,  as  I  have  done,  by  prov- 
ing that  it  was  authorized  and  commanded  by  scripture,  practised  by 
the  early  church  in  its  purity,  and  advocated  by  two  of  the  most  nu- 
merous and  respectable  sects,  viz.  Episcopalians  and  Methodists 
Now,  if  my  friend  says,  that  persons  in  those  communions  never  g 
to  confession,  according  to  the  discipline  and  ritual,  it  only  proves 
their  inconsistency,     i'riests  and  bishops  do  confess,  and  that  fre- 

3uently.  The  more  pious  and  sincere  they  are,  the  more  faithfully 
o  they  comply  with  the  salutary  ordinance. 
We  do  not  dissuade  )'oung  people  from  marrying,  we  only  regret 
that  tho«5e  who  are  called  to  that  state,  do  not  marry  faster.  What  is 
the  object  of  all  that  tirade  of  abusive  extracts  against  the  Catholic 
church  ?  Must  I  have  to  read  dissertations  to  my  opponent  on  all  the 
humbugs,  which  his  criticism  has  not  been  long  enough  at  school  to 
detect  1  The  book  "  De  Corrupto  Ecclesise  Statu,  was  not  written  by 
its  putative  author  Nicolaus  de  Clamangis,  who  was  secretary  to  the 
anti-pope  Benedict  XIII.  John  De  Chelm,  James  De  Cleur,  and  John 
of  Bavaria,  have  had  respectively  the  honor  of  a  production  of  which, 
its  real  author  had  reason  to  be  ashamed.  I  wish  my  friend  would  spare 

me  the  necessity  of  such  frequent  exposure  of  his I  won't  say  it. 

Here  are  the  complete  works  of  Liguori,  in  eight  volumes,  with  an 
Index  consisting  of  one  volume.  I  have  performed  a  work  of  supere- 
rogation. I  have  examined  these  volumes,  from  cover  to  cover,  and 
in  none  of  them  can  so  much  as  a  shadow  be  found  for  the  infamous 
charge.  I  exonerate  my  friend  from  the  sin  of  wilful  misrepresenta- 
tion, I  will  say  he  has  been  deceived,  misled  by — anti-christ,  perhaps, 
who  can  deceive  the  elect,  if  possible,  that  is  to  say,  if  Pll  let  him, 
which  I  have,  in  this  instance,  no  notion  of  doing.  The  original  tells 
the  truth.  The  translation  lies.  My  friends,  1  hope  that  the  same 
audience,  which  is  here  now,  will  be  here  this  evening,  and  I  pledge 
myself,  before  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  that  this  base  slander  is 
what  I  call  it.  There  is  no  foundation  for  it  whatever  in  the  works 
of  Liguori.  On  the  contrary,  in  the  place  indicated,  the  severest 
punishment,  known  to  church  discipline,  is  pronounced  against  the 
ecclesiastic  who  violates  the  holy  law ;  "  Thou  shalt  perform  unto  the 
Lord  thine  oath."     Numbers  xxx.  2  and  seq. 

I  know  of  no  better  vindication  of  Catholic  doctrines  and  practices, 
than  their  simple  and  faithful  announcement.  It  is  the  misrepresen- 
tation of  our  tenets  that  did  us  injury  for  times  and  a  time  and  half  a 
time;  but  now  the  light  from  heaven  is  breaking.  "  Thou  hast  ap- 
pointed darkness,  and  it  is  night,  in  it  shall  all  the  beasts  of  the  earth 
fo  about, — the  sun  riseth — and  they  shall  lie  down  in  their  dens." 
s.  ciii.  20,  22. 

My  learned  opponent  says  the  Tiber  runs  into  the  Mediterranean. 
That  is  a  fact,  and  so  do  the  waters  of  a  thousand  other  streams.  He 
says  that  I  did  not  prove  that  there  was  a  head  of  the  church  in  Rome 
before  Constantine's  time.  This  I  may  simply  deny;  but  have  I  not 
quoted  the  testimony  of  general  councils,  of  the  fathers,  of  numbe*  less 
W 


254  -  DEBATE   OX    THE 

appeals  to  Rome,  of  Paorans,  historians  and  emperors,  to  prove  that, 
now  incontestible,  fact'?  I  refer  to  Eusebius,  and  add  one  remark  that 
Eusebius  was  born  in  270.  His  history  extends  to  the  year  324,  the 
epoch  when  Constantine  was  sole  master  of  the  Roman  empire.  Eu- 
sebius narrated  the  belief  of  the  whole  church  during  the  preceding 
two  hundred  years,  for  no  longer  period  had  elapsed  since  the  death  of 
St.  John — and  Polycarp,  Ignatius,  Irenaeus,  Caius,  a  Roman  priest, 
and  Hegesippus,  the  ecclesiastical  historian,  lived  in  that  interval. 
Read  Eusebius.  My  friend  has  now  allowed  that,  for  a  long  time,  the 
church  of  Rome  was  pure.  This  is  true ;  but  when  will  he  fulfil  his 
promise  at  the  opening  of  the  debate  and  inform  us,  at  last,  from  what 
church  she  is  an  apostacyl  We*are  coming  near  the  end  of  the  dis- 
cussion and  this  is  too  important  a  point  to  he  forgotten. 

"The church  formerly  used  the  vernacular  language."  So  she  did. 
And  there  was  a  very  good  reason  for  it.  The  Latin  then  was  the  ver- 
nacular of  the  greatest  part  of  the  civilized  world,  in  consequence  of 
the  Roman  conquests.  It  was  generally  known,  where  other  lan- 
guages continued  to  be  the  vernacular.  St.  Paul  wrote  to  the  Romans 
in  Greek,  a  language  which  all  the  Romans  did  not  understand.  My 
friend  Mr.  Campbell  has  stated  the  very  best  reasons,  in  the  preface  to 
his  now  Testament,  for  the  adoption  of  a  uniform  language  as  the  ve- 
hicle of  revelation.  The  learned  Southey  agrees,  if  not  with  him,  at 
least,  with  the  Catholic  church  on  the  subject  of  its  peculiar  fitness  to 
be  the  language  of  the  Christian  Liturgy. 

"  Latin,"  says  Southey,  Vol.  I.  p.  59,  "  was  made  the  language  of  religion :  there 
had  been  the  saine  reason  for  this  in  Italy,  and  Spain,  and  France,  as  for  making 
it  the  language  of  the  laws;  and  in  England  also,  there  was  reason,  which, 
though  ditTerent,  was  not  less  valid.  A  common  language  was  necessary  for 
the  clergy,  who  considered  themselves  as  belonging,  less  to  the  country, 
in  which  they  happened,  individually  to  have  been  bom,  or  stationed,  than  to 
their  order,  or  to  Christendom,  for  in  these  ages  Christendom  was  regarded  as 
something  more  than  a  mere  name.  No  modern  language  was  as  yet  fix- 
ed, or  reduced  to  rules  or  regarded  as  a  written  tongue;  of  necessity,  therefore, 
Ljitin,  in  which  the  western  clergy  read  the  scriptures,  and  in  which  the  fathers 
ol  the  western  church  had  composed  their  works,  and  the  councils  had  issued 
their  decrees,  was  every  where  retained  as  the  natural  and  professional  lan- 
guage of  the  ministers  of  religion.  They  preached  and  catechiied,  and  confer- 
red in  the  common  speech  of  the  country,  and  that  the  church  ser\')cewas  not  ver- 
bally intelligible  to  tne  congregation  was,  upon  their  principles,  no  inconvenience. 

But  if,  in  this  respect,  there  was  no  real  disadvantage  in  the  use  of  a  foreign 
tongue;  in  other  respects  many  and  most  important  advantages  arose  from  it. 
The  clergy  became  of  necessity  a  learned  body;  and  to  their  humble  and  pa- 
tient labors  we  owe  the  whole  history  of  the  middle  ages,  and  the  preservation 
of  those  works  of  antiquity,  which,  for  the  instruction  of  all  after  ages,  have  been 
preserved:  The  students  at  Canterbury  in  Bede's  time,  wfcre  as  well  skilled, both 
in  Latin  and  Greek  as  in  their  native  speech;  and  Bede,  himself  (worthy  to  be 
called  venerable,  if  ever  that  epithet  was  worthily  applied)  had  acquired  all  that 
could  possibly  be  learned  from  books,  and,  was  master  of  what  was  then,  the 
whole  circle  of  human  knowledge." 

The  people  have  the  substance,  frequently  the  literal  translation,  in 
their  prayer  books,  of  what  the  Priest  reads,  during  the  sacrifice,  in 
the  ancient  language  of  Catholic  Europe.  They  know  as  well  as  the 
priest,  himself,  does,  to  what  they  answer,  '  Amen.'  When  a  foreigner 
from  any  of  the  countries  where  Greek  is  not  the  vernacular  comes  in- 
to our  churches,  and  I  need  scarcely  except  even  the  Catholics,  of  the 
Greek  rite,  he  is  perfectly  at  home,  among  his  brethren  in  faith  and 
worship.  Their  ceremonies  and  prayers  are  the  same  as  in  his  native 
'sand — Germans,  French,  English,  Irish,  Poles,  Swiss,  Taliaiis,  Por- 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  255 

tuflpiese,  like  th?  Jews,  devout  men  from  every  nation  under  heaven,  we 
hear  our  priests,  as  they  did  the  apostles,  speaking  in  a  tongue  which 
we  well  may  call  our  own,  "  the  wonderful  works  of  God."  The  ser- 
mons of  our  churcJi  are  not  preached  in  Latin,  but  in  as  plain  English 
as  we  can  find  in  common  use. 

I  have  answered  all  I  could  note  of  the  gentleman's  remarks.  I  have 
only  two  of  my  own  to  add  at  present.  It  is  in  reference  to  the  assei- 
tion  of  my  learned  opponent  that  monsters  are  always  emblematical 
of  bad  men  or  tyrants.  Now  what  will  my  friend  say  of  Ezekiel  1st 
ch.  "  And  I  saw — and  behold  a  whirlwind  came  out  of  the  north  : 
and  a  great  cloud,  and  a  fire  infolding  it,  and  brightness  was  about  it; 
and  out  of  the  midst  thereof,  that  is,  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire,  as  it 
were  the  resemblance  of  Amber,/and  in  the  midst  thereof  the  likeness 
of  four  living  creatures  :  and  this  was  their  appearance  :  4here  was  tlie 
likeness  of  a  man  in  them.  Every  one  had  four  faces,  and  every  one 
four  wings.  Their  feet  were  straight  feet,  and  the  sole  of  their  foot 
was  like  the  sole  of  a  calf's  foot ;  and  they  sparkled  like  the  appear- 
ance of  glowing  brass.  And  they  had  the  hands  of  a  man,  under  their 
wings,  on  their  four  sides :  and  they  had  faces,  and  wings  on  their 
sides.  And  I  heard  the  noise  of  their  wings,  like  the  noise  of  many 
waters,  as  it  were  the  voice  of  the  most  high  God  ; — ^This  was  the 
vision  of  the  likeness  of  the  glory  of  tlie  Lord."  What  will  my  friend 
now  say  of  his  monster  theory  ]  These  animals  are  taken  to  h?ve 
been  figures  of  the  four  Evangelists, — or  of  all  the  Apostles. 

My  second  remark  is,  thai  whoever  has  read  Hume's  or  Lingard's 
history  of  England,  knows  that  the  Ana-baptists  when  driven  by  arm- 
ed soldiers  out  of  the  Parliament  House,  found  in  the  famous  Oliver 
Cromwell,  a  perfect  fac-simile  of  the  Anti-Christ. — [Time  expired.] 

Three  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises —  • 

There  was  one  remark  made  by  my  opponent,  in  his  last  speech, 
and  only  one  that  had  some  appropriate  reference  to  my  remarks  on 
symbols.  Upon  this  remark,  I  will  make  one  affirmation.  Whatever 
else  he  has  been  pleased  to  say,  may  pass  for  what  it  is  worth,  tax  free. 

The  gentleman  asserts,  that  beasts  of  prey  are  not  always  sym- 
bolical of  tyrants.  Had  I  asserted  that  proposition,  it  would  have 
been  in  point  to  have  made  such  a  remark  :  but  unfortunately  for  him, 
that  was  not  my  proposition.  It  was,  that  when  God  depicts  a  tyran- 
ny, he  selects  some  monster,  or  some  savage  wild  beast  to  symbolize 
it.  But  is  that  identical  with — "  beasts  of  prey  in  symbolic  language 
only  represent  tyrants  ■?"  Or  follows  it  from  my  proposition,  that  a  lion 
or  an  eagle  must  ahvays  and  uniformly  represent  a  tyrant  ? — I  went  far- 
ther and  said,  that  some  savage  wild  beast — some  monster  was  God's 
iiiage  of  a  secular  or  ecclesiastic  despotism.  This  was  my  explanation. 

It  is  true  that  a  "  lion,"  as  well  as  a  "  lamb"  is  applied  to  the  Sa- 
vior. He  is  the  "  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  :"  but  Daniel's  lion  had 
win^s,  and  came  from  the  sea.     It  was  a  monster. 

The  Roman  spirit,  in  other  words,  the  savage  spirit  of  pagan  and 
papal  Rome,  has  been  imparted  even  to  Protestant  states.  In  so  much 
that  England  has  for  her  symbol,  or  national  device,  a  tawny  lion; 
and  her  sons  have  chosen  their  own  eagle,  a  ravenous  bird  of  prey, 
for  their  device,  that  they  may  pounce  upon  their  mother's  lion  and 
ehow  themselves  as  full  of  war  and  stratagem  and  spoils,  as  the  bar- 


256  DEBATE    ON    THE 

barous  and  uncivilized  nations  of  the  old  pagan  world. — Altliough  1 
prefer  the  American  Eagle  to  the  British  Lion,  I  would  rather  fight 
the  battles  of  my  king,  under  the  device  ot  a  milk  white  dove,  on  an 
azure  flag,  as  more  consonant  to  the  genius  of  the  Reign  of  heaven. 
War  lowever,  is  wholly  barbarous.  Nations  at  war,  are  at  best  but 
partly  civilized,  and,  therefore,  they  generally  choose  beasts  of  prey 
for  their  insignia.  When  we  become  more  rational,  more  civilized, 
and  more  christian,  we  will  find  some  other  way  of  settling  our  na- 
tional disputes,  than  with  the  sword,  and  with  the  confused  noise  of 
the  warrior,  and  garments  baptized  in  blood. 

The  gentleman  asked,  the  other  day,  (and  I  know  not  whether 
in  the  crowd  of  curious  and  impertinent  matters  introduced,  I  paid 
any  attention  to  it) — if  God  could  make  twelve  men  infallible,  could 
he  not  make  as  many  more  infallible  as  he  pleased ;  and  continue 
them  through  all  succeeding  time?!  Certainly  he  could,  I  answer: 
but  there  is  no  philosophy  in  this  question.  I  might  retort,  could  not 
God  have  made  fourteen  instead  of  seven  primary  planets  1  and  as 
many  satellites  as  he  pleased  1  And  the  same  answer  would  equally 
suit  both  questions.  We  therefore  answer  by  saying,  that  neither 
the  system  of  nature,  nor  the  system  of  religion  needs  them.  The 
inspired  twelve  made  a  full  revelation  of  christian  truth.  They  taught 
the  whole  religion :  We  need  nothing  more.  If  a  full  and  explicit 
development,  is  once  made,  and  carefully  preserved ;  ten  thousand 
apostles  could  not  perfect  the  christian  system,  by  adding  a  new  idea. 

My  friend  gave  me  a  challenge  the  other  day :  I  think  I  have  ac- 
cepted it :  he  now  adds  from  some  new  source,  or  repeats,  I  know 
not  which,  "  If  the  testimony  of  tradition  be  not  infallible  how  can 
you  know  the  Bible  to  be  inspired  ?"  This,  together  with  his  repeated 
assertion  that  Protestants  believe  in  the  bible  on  the  same  testimony 
he  offers  for  the  succession  of  Peter,  &c.;  I  reserved  for  my  sixth  pro- 
position, which,  because  of  the  advanced  state  of  the  discussion,  as 
respects  time,  is  likely  to  be  crowded  into  a  corner,  1  therefore  beg 
permission  to  introduce  it  at  this  time. 

"Paul'.  VI.  JVotwitiistaiuliiig  her  pi-etensloiis  to  have  given  US  the  Bible,  and 
faith  in  it,  we  ate  perfecth  independent  ot' her  (or  our  knowledge  of  that  book, 
and  its  evidences  oCa  divine  original." 

The  Roman  Catholic  says,  as  the  bishop  has  himself  averred,  "  I 
believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic  church  :"  but  this  phrase  needs  a  general 
council  to  explain  it.  Does  it  mean,  I  believe  the  Catholic  church ; 
or,  I  believe  in  the  Catholic  church  ]  Do  they  confide  in  it  for  salva- 
tion, or  only  believe  what  it  believes  ;  and  because  it  believes  it  1  It  is 
ambiguous.  The  "  fides  carbonaria"  is  thus  expressed  :  "  I  believe 
what  the  church  believes ;  and  the  church  believes  what  I  believe ; 
and  we  both  believe  the  same  thing."  Or,  as  repeated  the  other 
day,  the  Roman  Catholic  believes  the  bible  on  the  authority  of  the 
church,  and  the  church  on  the  authority  of  the  bible  !  But  the  Chris- 
tian is  commanded  and  expected  to  be  always  ready  to  give  a  reason 
for  the  faith  that  is  in  him.  God  is  reason ;  and  every  communica- 
tion from  him  is  rational ;  and  as  man  is  a  reasonable  being,  he  must 
have  good  reasons  to  offer  for  his  believing  the  christian  religion. 
When  you  ask  a  Roman  Catholic  the  reason  of  his  faith,  what  does 
he  answer?  His  father  told  him  that  the  Roman  Catholic  was  the 
true  church.  The  same  reason  would  justify  any  one  for  being  a 
Jew,  a  Turk,  or  an  infidel.     He  that  is  of  the  order  of  Ali  or  Omar, 


ROHAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGION.  257 

has  then,  as  good  a  reason  to  give  for  his  faith  in  the  Koran,  as  any 
Romanist  has  to  give  for  his  faith  in  the  bible,  if  his  answer  to  the 
question,  '  why  do  you  believe  ?'  is.  Because  my  father,  or  the  mosque, 
or  the  church  told  me  it  was  so.  I  would,  indeed,  be  gratified  to  leai u 
from  my  opponent.  Dr.  Purcell,  why  he  would  not  have  had  as  good 
'eason  for  believing  in  the  Koran,  as  he  has  for  being  a  Roman  Ca- 
tholic, on  the  ground  of  mere  tradition,  had  he  happened  to  have  been 
born  in  Turkey  1  There  must  be  an  examination  of  the  testimony, 
and  perception  of  its  truth,  on  its  own  intrinsic  excellence;  or,  a  con- 
riction  of  its  truth  upon  the  evidence  which  it  affords ;  else  there  is  no 
leason  in  faith — it  is  mere  credulity,  or  superstition. 

The  first,  and  characteristic  difference,  between  the  Protestant  and 
tie  Roman  Catholic,  is  this  :  the  former  believes  the  scriptures  first, 
and  the  church  afterwards ;  whereas,  the  latter  believes  the  church 
first,  and  the  scriptures  afterwards.  "  But,"  says  the  bishop,  "where 
does  the  Protestant  get  the  bible  to  believe,  but  through  the  church  V 
And  that  first  brmgs  us  to  the  proposition. 

If  any  person  hand  me  a  book,  and  I  read  it,  and  believe  it,  does  my 
faith  in  it  necessarily  rest  upon  him  who  hands  it  to  me  1  And,  yet, 
this  is  the  gigantic  strength  of  all  that  my  opponent  can  say  on  this 
subject.  It  would  be  much  more  plausible,  that  the  Protestants  are 
indebted  exclusively  to  the  Roman  Catholic  church  for  the  book,  if 
Protestants  believed  all  the  Roman  Catholic  traditions,  as  well  as  the 
bible  :  but,  while  we  reject  the  apocrypha,  and  the  traditions  of  popery, 
and  receive  the  bible  only,  this  fact  will  answer  a  thousand  volumes  of 
sophistry,  in  proof  that  our  faith  in  the  bible,  rests  not  upon  the  author- 
ity of  the  church  of  Rome.  The  fact,  that  we  reject  her  apocryphal 
bible  and  testament,  with  all  other  traditions  of  Roman  Catholics,  an- 
cient and  modern,  resting  solely  upon  her  authority,  and  that  we  re- 
tain the  bible,  (one  version  of  which  she  has,)  is  incontestable  proof, 
that  we  receive  the  bible  on  other  authority  than  her  traditions.  Dis- 
pose of  this  fact  who  may,  I  affirm  that  my  opponent  never  can  !  This 
illustrious  and  indisputable  fact,  places  in  bold  relief  the  irrelevancy 
of  his  effort  to  show,  that  our  faith  in  the  bible,  and  his  belief  in  Pe- 
ter's Roman  diocese,  or  in  his  being  bishop  of  Rome,  rest  upon  the 
same  authority.  That  I  must  believe  a  letter  on  the  authority  of  him 
who  carries  it,  or  a  book  on  the  authority  of  him  who  puts  it  in  my 
hand,  is  another  of  the  assumptions  of  the  church  of  encroachments, 
resting  upon  Peter's  having  been  bishop  of  Rome. 

God  created  both  the  sun  and  the  human  eye,  and  he  has  arlapted 
them  to  each  other.  He  created  the  human  understanding  and  the 
bible,  and  adapted  them  to  each  other.  The  honest  student  of  nature 
needs  no  tradition  to  prove  that  man  made  not  the  sun  ;  neither  does 
the  humble  and  candid  student  of  the  bi\jle,  need  any  witness  from  the 
bishops  or  church  of  Rome,  that  they  did  not  make  the  bible.  She  is,  in- 
deed, a  witness  for  the  bible,  and  the  true  church,  somewhere  else  ex- 
isting than  in  her  own  communion  :  for,  had  it  not  been  for  her  rivals, 
who,  like  Argus,  have  ever  watched  the  sacred  text,  how  it  would 
have  been  interpolated  and  corrupted,  her  editions  of  the  primitive  fa- 
thers, and  other  books  of  which  she  was  the  sole  or  chief  depository, 
abundantly  declare.  But,  having  fixed  the  date,  not  merely  of  the  first 
pope,  but  of  the  grand  schism  which  originated  the  Roman  Catholic 
church.  I  hasten,  with  all  despatch,  to  show  that  we  have  copies  of  tlie 
w2  17 


258  DEBATE    ON    THE 

bible  more  ancient  than  the  grand  schism,  more  ancient  than  the  first 

Cope:  nay,  that  were  written  before  the  question  of  a  supreme  head 
egan  to  be  discussed  ;  and  which  copies,  in  the  form  of  transcription, 
have  never  been  soiled  by  the  fingers  of  a  monk.  I  read  but  a  few 
documents,  as  I  have  but  little  time  for  this  subject ;  but  I  read  them 
from  a  source  of  biblical  authority,  which,  on  these  points,  has  not 
been,  and,  I  presume,  will  not  be,  disputed  ;  "  Home's  Introduction: 
"  Of  the  few  manuscripts  known  to  be  extant,  which  contain  the  Greek  Scrip- 
tures (that  is,  the  Old  Testament,  according-  to  the  Septuagint  version,  and  the 
Kew  Testament)  there  are  two  which  f»re-eminently  demand  the  attention  of 
the  Biblical  student  for  their  antiquity  and  intrinsic  value,  viz.  The  Alexandrian 
manuscript,  which  is  preserved  in  the  British  museum,  and  the  Vatican  manuscript 
deposited  in  the  library  of  the  Vatican  Palace  at  Rome. 

I.  The  Codex  Alexandrinus,  or  Alexandrian  manuscripts,  which  is  noted  by 
the  letter  A  in  Wetstein's  and  Griesbach's  rritical  editions  of  the  New  Testa- 
nient,  consists  of  four  folio  volumes;  the  thrte  first  contain  the-whole  of  the  Old 
Testament,  together  with  the  Apocn-phal  books,  and  the  fourth  comprises  the 
New  Testament,  the  first  epistle  of  Clement  to  the  Cortnthians,  and  the  Apoc- 
ryphal psalms  ascribed  to  Solomon.  In  the  New  Testament  there  is  wanting  the 
beginning  as  far  as  Matth.  xxv.  6.  «  yuMV'if  «(>x't«';  likewise  from  John  vi.  50.  to 
viii.  52.  and  from  the  2  Cor.  iv.  13.  to  xii.  7.  [This  manuscript  is  now  preserved 
in  the  British  museum,  where  it  was  deposited  in  1753.  It  was  sent  as  a  present  to 
king  Charles  I.  from  Cyrillus  Lucaris,  a  native  of  Crete,  and  patriarch  of  Con- 
stantinople, by  Sir  Thomas  Rowe,  ambassador  from  England  to  the  Grand  Seign- 
ior, in  the  year  1628.  Cyrillus  brought  it  with  him  from  Alexandria,  where, 
probably,,  it  was  written.  In  a  schedule  annexed  to  it,  he  gives  this  account; 
that  it  was  written,  as  tradition  informed  them,  by  Thecla,  a  noble  Egyptian 
lady,  about  thirteen  hundred  years  ago,  a  little  after  the  council  of  Nice.  Ho 
adds  that  the  name  of  Thecla  at  the  end  of  the  book  was  erased;  but  that  thi« 
was  the  case  with  other  books  of  the  christians,  after  Christianity  was  extin- 
guished in  Eg)'pt  by  the  Mohammedans:  and  that  recent  tradition  records  the  fact 
of  the  laceration  and  erasure  of  Thecla's  name.  The  proprietor  of  this  manuscript, 
before  it  came  into  the  hands  of  Cyrillus  Lucaris,  had  written  an  Arabic  sub- 
scription, expressing  that  this  book  was  said  to  have  been  written  with  the  pen 
of  Thecla  the  martyr."  [Introduction  to  the  critical  study  and  knowledge  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  by  Thomas  Hartwell  Home.  Vol.  II.  pji.  66,  67. 

But,  this  is  not  the  only  a7i/£-papisticaI  manuscript  of  the  scriptu  re, 
now  extant. 

II.  "The  Codex  Vaticanus,  No.  1209,  which  Wetstein  and  Griesbach 
have  both  noted  with  the  letter  B,  contests  the  palm  of  antiquity  with  the  Alex- 
andrian manuscript.  No  fac-simile  of  it  has  ever  been  published.  The  Roman 
edition  of  the  Septuagint,  printed  in  1590,  professes  to  exhibit  the  text  of  this 
manuscript;  and  in  the  prelace  to  that  edition  it  is  stated  to  have  been  written 
before  the  year  387,  i.  e,  towards  the  close  of  the  4th  century:  Montfaucon 
and  Blanchini  refer  it  to  the  5th  or  6th  centurj-,  and  Du  Pin  to  the  7th  cen- 
tury. Professor  Hug  has  endeavored  to  shew  that  it  was  written  in  the  early 
part  of  the  fourth  century;  but,  from  the  omission  of  the  Eusebian  xi^xKxtx  and 
titxu.  Bishop  Marsh  concludes  with  great  probability,  that  it  was  written  be- 
fore the  close  of  the  fifth  century.  The  Vatican  manuscript  is  written  on  parch- 
ment or  vellum  in  uncial  or  capital  letters,  in  three  columns  on  each  page,  all  of 
which  are  of  the  same  size,  except  at  the  beginning  of  a  book,  and  without  any 
divisions  of  chapters,  verses,  or  words,  but  with  accents  and  spirits.  The  shape 
of  the  letters,  and  color  of  the  ink,  prove  that  it  was  written  throughout  by  one 
and  the  same  careful  copj'ist."     Id.  ib.  p.  74. 

There  are  also  versions  older  than  the  papacy,  older  than  tfie  vul- 
gate,  which  is  itself  evidently  older  than  the  church  of  Rome. 

"Syria  being  visited  at  a  very  early  period  by  the  preachers  of  the  christian 
faith,  several  translations  of  the  sacred  volume  were  made  into  the  language  of 
that  country.  The  most  celebrated  of  these  is  the  Peschito  or  Littrcd  (  Versio 
Simplex,)  as  it  is  usually  called,  on  account  of  its  very  close  adherence  to  the 
Hebrew  text,  from  which  it  was  immediately  made.  The  most  extravagant  as- 
tertious  have  been  advanced  coocerniug  its  antiquity,   some  referring  it  to  the 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  259 

lime  of  Solomon  and  Hiram,  while  others  ascribe  it  to  Asa,  the  pt  jest  of  Sama- 
ritans, and  a  third  class,  to  the  apostle  Thaddeus.  This  last  tradition  is  receiv- 
ed by  the  Syrian  churches;  but  a  more  recent  date  is  ascribed  to  it  by  modem 
biblical  philologers.  Bishop  Walton,  Carpzov,  Leusden,  Hishop  Lowth,  and 
Dr.  Kennicott,  fix  its  date  to  the  first  century ;  Bauer,  and  some  other  Gennan 
critics,  to  the  second  or  third  century:  Jahn  fixes  it  at  the  latest,  to  the  second 
century;  De  Rossi  pronounces  it  to  be  very  ancient,  but  does  not  specify  any 
precise  date.  The  most  probable  opinion  is  that  of  Michaelis,  who  ascribes  it  to 
the  close  of  the  first  or  to  the  earlier  part  of  the  second  century,  at  which  time 
the  Syrian  churches  flourished  most,  and  the  christians  at  Edessa  had  a  temple 
for  divine  worship  erected  after  the  model  of  that  at  Jerusalem:  and  it  is  not  to 
he  supposed  that  th'ey  would  be  without  a  version  of  the  old  Testament,  th« 
reading  of  which  had  been  introduced  by  the  apostles."     Id.  ib.  pp.187,  188. 

"  An  important  accession  to  biblical  literature  was  made  a  few  years  since,  by 
the  late  learned  and  excellent  Dr.  Buchanan,  to  whose  assiduous  labors  the 
British  church  in  India  is  most  deeply  indebted:  and  who,  in  his  progress 
among  the  Syrian  churches  and  Jews  of  India,  discovered  and  obtained  nume 
rous  ancient  manuscripts  of  the  scriptures,  which  are  now  deposited  in  the  pub- 
lic library  at  Cambridge.  One  of  these,  which  was  discovered  in  a  remote  Syri- 
an church  near  the  mountains,  is  particularly  valuable:  it  contains  the  old  and 
new  Testaments,  engrossed  with  beautiful  accuracy  in  the  Esirangelo  (or  old 
Syriac,)  character,  on  strong  vellum,  in  large  folio,  and  having  three  columns  in 
a  page.  The  words  of  every  book  are  numbered :  and  the  volume  illuminated, 
but  not  after  the  European  manner,  the  initial  letters  having  no  ornament. 
Though  somewhat  injured  by  time  or  neglect,  the  ink  being  in  certain  places 
obliterated,  still  the  letters  can,  in  general,  be  distinctly  traced  from  the  im- 
press of  the  pen,  or  from  the  partial  corrosion  of  the  ink.  The  Syrian  church  as- 
signs a  high  date  to  this  nifinuscript,  which  \a  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Yeates,  who 
has  published  a  collation  of  the  Pentateuch,  was  written  about  the  seventh 
century.  In  looking  over  this  nianuscript,  Dr.  Buchanan  found  the  very  first 
emendation  of  the  Hebrew  text  proposed  by  Dr.  Kennicott,  which  doubtless  is 
the  true  reading.     Id.  ib.  p.  189. 

Now,  if  we  of  the  west  of  Europe,  did  receive  the  bible  first  from 
our  Roman  Catholic  ancestors.  I  ask,  would  that  make  us  dependent 
on  their  traditions  alone  for  that  book  ;  any  more  than  A.  B.,  who 
lived  on  one  of  the  seven  mouths  of  the  Nile,  from  which  he  supplies 
himself  with  water,  was,  on  that  account,  absolutely  dependent  on  the 
branch  nearest  his  dwelling.  Tell  him  that  he  is  absolutely  and  alone 
dependent  on  it  for  water  ;  and  he  will  say,  "  No ;  but  it  is  more  con- 
venient to  supply  myself  from  this  stream :  there  are  six  other  branch- 
es, from  which  I  could  supply  myself,  were  it  necessary  for  my  life  or 
comfort."  So  say  we.  We  have  .Tews,  Greeks,  Armenians,  and  Pro- 
testants, from  the  first  schism,  A.  D.  250,  down  to  the  present  day ; 
to  say  nothing  of  the  ancient  sceptics,  Celsus,  Porphyry,  Julian,  and 
others  ;  and  the  ancient  heretics,  from'whose  writings,  together  with 
those  of  the  ir  fidel  pagans,  we  could  almost  compile  a  New  Testa- 
ment, containing  every  thing  read,  not  only  since,  but  before  the  coun- 
cil of  Laodicea.  Du  Pin  himself  acknowledges,  that  before  that  coun- 
cil, even  in  the  third  century,  the  scriptures  were  read  as  they  are  now. 
But,  as  for  our  independence  of  all  Roman  Catholic  tradition,  on  this 
subject,  many  other  proofs  may  be  offered.  The  notorious  and  glorious 
fa.'-.t,  however,  that  Protestants  have  rejected  the  Roman  Catholic  rule 
of  faith,  apocrypha,  traditions,  and  all,  and  even  her  own  vulgate,  as 
aull  entic,  will  for  ever  frown  out  of  countenance,  the  groundless  im- 
putations of  m/  too  credulous  opponent.    [Time  expired.] 

•  Half  past  3  o'clock^  P.  M. 

BiSHOl'  PURCELL  rises — 

My  friends,  have  you  ever  seen  the  Anti-Christ?  Look  at  him  now 
(holding  up  a  book.)     This  morning,  I  endeavored  to  shew  that  Ma- 


260 


DEBATE    ON    THE 


hommed  was  the  fittest  beast,  to  illustrate  the  mysterious  prophecy; 
and  I  stated  that  many  names  (fourteen)  could  be  found  to  correspond 
with  the  numbers  6G6.  I  now  distinctly  shew  the  page  and  book, 
where  the  computation  is  made  and  the  last  of  these  names  is  tliat  of 
God  himself.  Cerdenus,  a  Greek  writer,  testifies  th^t  the  name  ot 
Mahommed,  as  it  was  written  in  his  time,  will  exactly  spell  the  beast. 
On  this  subject,  the  reader  who  is  not  content  with  the  article,  Anti- 
Christ,  in  Robinson's  Calmet,  may  refer  to  Walmesley's  General  His- 
tory of  the  Christian  church,  p.  250. 

I  do  not  give  my  own  theory  of  the  matter.  There  have  been  too 
many  theorists  already,  to  need  more.  I  believe  the  beast  was  neither 
Luther,  nor  Mahommed,  nor  the  pope.  This  is  not  an  article  of  taith 
with  me,  nor  with  any  Catholic.  I  respect  the  prophecy,  but  I  await 
to  decide  the  questions  until '  Revelations'  be  what  the  term  imports. 
I  have  here  a  history  of  the  popes,  in  French,  published,  as  the  title 
page  says  "  at  the  expense  of  the  holy  Father."  Of  course  it  is  to  be 
understood  to  be  a  hoax,  and  it  deserves  to  be  so  considered.  It  tells 
a  heap  of  lies  about  him ;  among  others  he  was  to  be  destroyed  for  evei 
in  1745.     We  may  then  write  his  epitaph. 

I  do  not  know  on  what  grounds  my  friend  asserted  yesterday,  thai 
the  2nd.  commandment  was  not  a  part  of  the  Catholic  rule  of  morals 
I  have  already  exhibited  various  catechisms,  in  use  in  the  United 
States,  in  all  of  which,  every  word  of  the  commandments  is  found.  ] 
suppose  my  friend  overlooked  the  fact.  I  was  glad  to  hear  the  gentle- 
man speak  so  highly  of  Michaelis.  It  showed  his  literary  knowledge ; 
and  perhaps  he  may  be  interested  in  knowing  thai  when  but  one  edi- 
tion of  his  works  could  be  obtained  in  Paris,  in  1824,  I  procured  it. 
Here  it  happens  by  a  singular  coincidence,  unknown  to  him,  to  be.  I 
invite  him  to  examine  in  it  the  commandments,  and  he  will  find  thenn 
fully  and  faithfully  rendered  in  every  Catholic  Bible  and  Testament 
Will  .my  friend  tell  the  audience  when  the  mazoretic  points,  without 
which  the  understanding  of  the  Bible,  if  not  impossible,  is  very  diffi 
cult,  were  first  introduced  1  and  by  whom  ? 

Do  all  Bible  readers  know,  as  they  ought  to  know,  that  in  the  old 
Hebrew  Bible,  there  is  no  division  of  verses,  much  less  of  chapters? 
That  a  Roman  Catholic  cardinal  had  a  good  deal  to  do  in  making  the 
division — and  that  they  were  not  Protestants,  but  Rabbis,  who  suffixed 
the  points  which  serve  instead  of  vowels  to  Hebrew  words,  which 
have  none  but  consonants  alone ;  accordingly,  as  these  vowels  are 
placed,  the  Hebrew  root  may  signify  whatever  the  pointer  pleases  ? 
The  context  of  the  oldest  known  meaning  must  be  the  only  criterion. 
But  I  should  likie  to  know  how  one  of  our  good,  plain,  homebred  and 
industrious  citizens  can  accomplish  this  task  for  himself.  Even  learn- 
ed men  made  themselves  ridiculous  by  their  mazoretic  fixtures  and 
translations,  and  Luther,  who  was  a  good  Catholic  scholar — laughing 
at  the  absurdity  of  their  versions  of  passages  in  the  Bible — observed 
that  "In  the  beginning  the  cuckoo  ate  the  sparrow  and  the  feathers," 
would  be  just  as  good  a  translation  of  the  first  line  of  Genesis,  as  some 
of  theirs.     I  will  return  to  this  subject. 

It  appears  that  Birds  and  Beasts  of  prey  may  represent  peace,  as 
well  as  cruelty.  England  then  suffers  no  disparagement  from  her 
Lion,  nor  the  United  States,  from  her  Eagle.  The  gentleman  sug- 
gests a  dove  for  the  latter.     I  have  not  the  slightest  objection,  and  if 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION,  261 

the  criticism  I  have  heard  be  correct,  the  bird  lately  stamped  on  th«  new 
American  coin  resembles  a  chicken,  more  than  a  bird  of  prey.  It  looks 
as  if  it  were  more  to  be  preyed  upon  than  preying,  and  more  sinned 
against  than  sinning. 

Before  I  come  to  the  very  important  point  of  the  Bible,  I  must  not 
forget  to  quote  the  testimony  of  the  eloquent  Southey,  to  shew  what 
anti-Christs  the  popes  were,  and  how  they  displayed  their  anti-christ- 
ian  spirit,  in  the  conversion  of  Old  England. 

"  That  <jregory,  who  was  afterwards  raised  to  the  popedom,  and  is  distin- 
guished from  succeeding  popes  of  the  same  name  (one  alone  excepted,)  by 
the  rank  of  saint,  and  from  him,  by  the  appellation  of  the  Great,  was  one  day 
led  into  the  market-place  at  Rome,  with  a  great  concourse  of  persons,  to  look 
at  a  large  importation  of  foreign  merchandise,  which  had  just  arrived.  Among 
other  articles,  there  were  some  bo3's  exposed  for  sale  like  cattle.  There  was 
nothing  remarkable  in  this,  for  it  was  the  custon)  every  where  in  that  age,  and 
had  been  so  from  time  immemorial:  but  he  was  struck  by  the  appearance  of  the 
boys,  their  tine  clear  skins,  the  beauty  of  their  flaxen  or  golden  hair,  and  their 
ingenuous  countenances;  so  that  he  asked  from  what  country  they  came;  and 
when  he  was  told  from  the  island  of  Britain,  where  the  inhabitants  in  general 
were  of  that  complexion  and  comeliness,  he  inquired  if  the  people  were  chris- 
tians, and  sighed  for  compassion  at  hearing  that  they  were  m  a  state  of  Pagan 

darkness From  that  day  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxons  became  a 

favorite  object  with  Gregory Accordingly  he  desiiatched  thither 

forty  missionaries  from  a  monastery,  which  he  had  founded  at  Konie 

VVhen,  therefore,  Augustine  (who  was  their  chief)  and  his  companions  landed 
in  the  isle  of  Thanet,  they  came  not  as  obscure  men,  unprotected  and  unaccred- 
ited; but  with  recommendations  from  the  kings  of  France,  and  as  messengers 
from  a  potentate,  whose  spiritual  authority  was  acknowledged  and  obeyed 
throughout  that  part  of  the  world,  to  which  the  northern  nations  were  accUs- 
tomeato  look  as  the  seat  of  empire  and  superior  civilization.  They  made  their 
arrival  known  to  Ethelbcrt,  and  requested  an  audience.  They  approached  in 
procession,  bearing  a  silver  crucifix,  and  a  portrait  of  our  Savior,  upon  a  ban- 
ner adorned  with  gold,  and  chaunting  the  litany.  The  king  welcomed  them  cour- 
teously, and  ordered  them  to  be  seated:  after  which,  Augustine  stood  up,  and, 
through  an  interpreter,  whom  he  had  brought  from  France,  delivered  the  pur- 
port of  his  mission,  in  a  brief,  but  well  ordered  and  impressive  discourse.  He 
was  come  to  the  king,  and  to  that  kingdom,  he  said,  for  their  eternal  good,  a 
messenger  of  good  tidings;  ottering  to  their  acceptance  perpetual  happiness, 
here  and  hereafter,  if  they  would  accept  his  words.  The  Creator  and  RecJeemer 
had  opened  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  the  human  race:  for  God  so  loved  the 
World  that  he  had  sent  into  it  his  only  son,  as  that  son  himself  testified,  to  be- 
come a  man  among  the  children  of  m*i,  and  suffer  death  upon  the  cross,  in 
atonement  for  their  sins.  That  incarnate  divinity  had  been  made  manifest  by 
innumerable  miracles.  Christ  had  stilled  the  winds  and  waves,  and  walked  upon 
the  waters:  he  had  heaU'.d  diseases,  and  restored  the  dead  to  life:  finally,  he  had 
risen  from  the  dead  himself,  that  we  might  rise  again  through  him,  and  had  as- 
cended into  heaven,  that  he  might  receive  us  there  in  his  glory;  and  he  would 
come  again  to  judge  both  the  quick  and  the.  dead.  "  Think  not,"  he  proceeded, 
♦*  O  most  excellent  king,  that  we  are  superstitious,  because  we  have  come  from 
Rome  into  thy  dominions,  for  the  sake  of  the  salvation  of  thee  and  of  thy  peo- 
ple; we  have  done  this,  being  constrained  by  great  love:  for  that  which  we  de- 
sire, above  all  the  pomps  and  delights  of  this  world,  is  to  have  our  fellow-crea- 
tures partakers  with  ourselves  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  &c."  [Southey's  Book 
of  the  Church,  chap.  iii.  p.  23.  etc. 

My  friend  proposed  a  question,  which  he  thought  difficult.  Why 
do  I  believe  the  bible  1  He  said  my  answer  would  be,  because  the 
church  believes  it ;  and  this,  he  says,  is  like  Peter  giving  a  character 
to  Paul,  and  Paul  to  Peter.  I  reciprocate  the  question  of  the  gentle- 
man, and  he  says  he  believes  in  the  church,  because  he  believes  in  the 
bible.  Thus  the  bible  and  church  testify  to  each  other  in  his  theory, 
and  the  difficulty  is  infinitely  greater  for  a  Protestant,  than  for  a  Ca 


S62  DEBATE   ON*   TUE 

tholic.  In  fact,  for  a  Catholic  the  question  is  not  susceptible  of  any 
difficulty,  whatever.  One  word  will  shew  that  we  are  right.  Which 
Was  prior]  The  bible  or  the  church^  ^Manifestly,  the  church  was  the 
older.  The  apostles  did  not  wait  to  have  thousands  of  bibles  copied, 
and  to  freight  vessels  with  them,  and  saiJ-»s  supercargoes  of  the  hea- 
venly merchandise,  to  the  distant  nations  of  the  earth.  "  /aiV/i,"  says 
St.  Paul,  "  comes  from  hearing."  There  were  millions  of  converts  to 
Christianity,  whole  nations  were  converted  to  the  Savior,  by  preach- 
ing,  before  the  different  books  composing  the  present  bible,  were  de- 
termined to  be  genuine  Scripture  and  collected  into  one  volume.  This 
was  not  done  before  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century.  The  church 
was  therefore  prior  to  the  bible  :  and  if  the  bible  had  never  been  writ- 
ten, the  gospel  could  have  been  preached  and  believed,  as  it  was  in 
the  early  ages,  without  its  aid.  How  did  the  apostles  make  converts 
without  the  bible?  They  addressed  themselves  to  the  reason  of  the 
unconverted  nations.  They  convinced  them,  if  necessary,  of  the  ex- 
istence of  God,  by  the  spectacle  of  the  divine  wisdom  and  power,  dis- 
played in  the  creation  and  preservation  of  the  world.  They  appealed 
to  the  natural  law,  whose  precepts  were  written  by  the  finger  of  God, 
op  tablets  of  flesh,  the  hearts  of  men,  before  they  were  engraven  on 
stone,  amidst  the  thunder  and  lightnings  of  Sinai.  Thus  did  they 
find  the  great  primary  truths  of  natural  religion,  with  regard  to 
both  doctrine  and  morals,  inculcated  by  the  contemplation  of  the 
visible  wonders  of  creation  and  the  testimony  of  the  human  heart. 
They  next  proceeded  to  convince  their  hearers  of  the  unity  of  God, 
and  the  sinfulness  and  grossness  of  idolatry,  of  their  having  departed 
from  the  moral  law,  of  the  darkness  in  which  sin  had  involved  the 
human  race,  of  our  incompetency  for  our  own  cure,  of  the  divine  com- 
miseration of  our  misery,  of  the  descent  of  Jesus  Christ,  his  doctrine, 
his  miracles,  his  charity,  his  establishment  of  his  church,  his  sacra- 
ments and  the  various  means  of  grace,  his  promises  to  be  with  his 
apostles,  He  and  his  Holy  Spirit,  for  ever,  his  death,  &c.  The  holiness 
of  the  apostles'  lives,  the  cruel  death  with  which  they  sealed  the  truth 
they  had  proclaimed,  conciliated  the  belief  and  completed  the  conversion 
of  their  hearers.  ^^  I  wiUtngly,"  says  Paschal,  "6e//ere  the  witnesses, 
who  let  their  throats  be  cut  to  attest  the  truth  of  what  they  declared  The 
bible  could  not  shed  its  blood  to  attest  its  divine  origin.  The  ignorant, 
who  are  a  large  proportion  of  the  human  race,  could  not  read  it ;  the 
learned,  and  the  pious,  and  the  sincere,  as  every  one  knows,  found  it 
a  task  far  above  their  strength,  to  distinguish  genuine  from  spurious 
scripture.  Before  the  invention  of  printing,  men  could  not  procure 
bibles :  since  the  invention  of  printing,  they  read  them  to  introduce  a 
flood  of  new  sects ;  so  that  there  are  now  as  many  religions,  almost, 
as  there  are  different  versions  or  diflTerent  readers  of  the  scriptures.  If, 
on  the  contrary,  there  is  anything  clearly  taught  in  the  scriptures,  it  is 
the  authority  of  the  church,  which,  without  aid  from  the  bible,  not  all 
composed  when  the  first  apostles  preached,  had  fully  established  her 
authority,  and,  independ;  ntly  of  her  miracles,  proved,  by  the  preter- 
natural success  of  her  preaching,  that  God  was  indeed  with  her,  as  he 
had  promised,  teaching  all  nations,  and  perpetually  suggesting  to  her 
all  truth.  Hence,  we  believe  in  the  church  first;  and  on  the  faith  of 
the  evidences  which  I  have  enumerated,  we  believe  in  the  bible,  which 
the  church  presents  to  us,  vouching  for  its  purity  and  authenticity. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELlfilON.  263 

The  bible  obtained,  sanctions  the  authority  of  the  church,  and  confirnns 
our  faith.  Here,  all  is  consistent,  and  our  submission  to  the  church  is 
reasonable.  The  Protestant  divines,  Hooker  and  Chillingworth,  allow 
that  the  bible  cannot  bear  testimony  to  itself:  even  Luther  was  forced 
to  acknowledge  it.  "  We  are  obliged,"  says  he,  "  to  yield  many 
things  to  the  papists ;  that  with  them  is  the  word  of  God,  that  we  re- 
ceived fjcom  them  ;  otherwise,  we  should  have  known  nothing  at  all 
about  it."  (Comment  on  John,  c.  16.)  Hence  the  remarkable  saying 
of  St.  Augustine  :  "  I  should  not  believe  the  gospel  itself,  if  the 
Catholic  church  did  not  oblige  me  to  do  so."  Will  my  friend  inform 
me,  why  he  rejects  an  authentic  work,  of  great  excellence,  written  by 
St.  Barnabas  ;  who  is  termed,  in  scripture,  an  apostle,  and  declared  to 
be  full  of  the  hcly  Ghost,  (Acts  xiv.  34,  xi.  24 ;)  and  receives,  as 
canonical,  parts  of  the  New  Testament,  which  were  not  written  by 
apostles  at  all,  viz.  the  gospels  of  St.  Mark  and  St.  Luke  ?  The  original 
text  of  Moses,  and  the  ancient  prophets,  was  destroyed  with  the  tem- 
ple and  city  of  Jerusalem,  by  the  Assyrians  under  Nebuchadnezzar;  and 
the  authentic  copies  which  replaced  them,  perished  in  the  persecution 
of  Antiochus.  How  were  these  books  restored  1  Paul  wrote  his 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  entrusted  it  to  the  deaconess  Phoebe.  His 
Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  he  confided  to  the  disciple  Tychicus.  How 
can  we  be  sure  of  these  epistles,  as  they  now  stand  in  the  Testament? 
Was  it  not  the  corruption  of  the  bible  by  Queen  Elizabeth's  bishops, 
that  caused  James  L  to  have  a  new  translation  to  be  made  1  But,  1 
should  be  endless,  if  I  enumerated  all  the  insurmountable  difficulties, 
which  a  Protestant  encounters  at  the  very  fii;st  step  of  his  journey  in 
quest  of  a  religion.  He  must  turn  Catholic  at  the  very  outset,  and  take 
the  bible,  as  he  gets  it,  on  authority,  or  remain  an  unbeliever  all  his  life. 
And  he  must  believe  that  authority  to  ie  infallible,  or  he  can  never  be  sure 
that  the  bible  it  gives  him  is  divine.  Catholics  have  faith  by  baptism,  as 
Protestants  have  ;  but  the  latter  lose  it  when  they  adopt,  on  arriving 
at  mature  age,  the  Protestant  principle,  that  every  man  must  find  out 
his  religion  for  himself,  from  the  bible.  Many  Protestants  are  not  ad- 
monished of  the  danger  of  their  situation,  and  do  not  themselves  reflect 
on  these  difficulties.  As  long  as  they  are  sincere,  and  do  the  best  they 
can  to  obey  God  and  conscience,  the  Catholic  church  excuses  them,  in 
the  words  of  St.  Augustine :  "  Let  tho%e  treat  you  harshly,  who  know  not 
how  hard  it  is  to  get  rid  of  old  prejudices.  Let  those  treat  you  harshly, 
who  have  not  learned  how  verj  hard  it  is  to  purify  the  interior  eye,  and 
render  it  capable  of  contemplating  the  sun  of  the  soul,  truth.  But,  as 
to  us  :  we  are  far  from  this  disposition  towards  persons  who  are  separ- 
ated from  us,  not  by  errors  of  their  own  invention,  but  by  their  being 
entangled  in  those  of  others.  We  are  so  far  from  this  disposition,  that 
we  pray  to  God,  that  in  refuting  the  false  opinions  of  those  whom  you 
follow,  not  from  malice,  but  from  imprudence,  he  would  besto\y  upon 
us  that  spirit  of  peace,  which  feels  no  other  sentiment  than  charity,  no 
other  interest  than  that  of  Jesus  Christ,  no  other  wish  but  for  your 
salvation."  Had  we  been  born  Mahommedans,  we  would,  perhaps, 
live  Mahommedans.  Thank  God,  we  are  not.  But,  this  does  not  re- 
quire us  to  throw  away  our  faith.  It  would  be  too  long  to  notice  all 
the  gentleman  says.     I  attend  to  the  most  important. 

Now,  I  will  venture  to  assert,  that  there  is  not  a  Protestant  in  this 
house,  wbo  can  say,  that  he  has  found  out  all  the  tenets  which  he  be- 


264  DEBATE   ON   THE 

lieres,  by  reading  the  bible  alone.  He  believes  them,  because  his 
parents,  and  teachers,  and  minister,  his  catechism,  taught  them ; 
or  a  hundred  other  influences  may  have  been  brought  to  bear  upon  his 
mind  and  his  affections,  favorable  to  those  peculiar  tenets.  It  is  not  at 
all  the  case  with  Protestant  children,  any  more  than  with  Catholic  chil- 
dren, that  reason  is  ihe  Jirsi  to  lead  ihem  to  their  belief.  Let  each  one 
candidly  examine  his  own  heart,  and  ask  himself  if  he  was  not  as 
much  educated  in  those  doctrines  which  he  now  professes,  as  the  Cath- 
olics were  in  theirs. 

How  can  he  be  sure,  if  he  indeed  possess  an  authentic  copy  of  the 
scriptures,  that  he  understands  them  1  "  The  word  of  God,"  says  the 
Protestant  bishop,  Walton,  "  does  not  consist  in  mere  letters,  whether 
writ'en  or  printed,  but  in  the  sense  of  it;  which  no  one  can  better  ia- 
lerpiet  than  the  true  church,  to  which  Christ  committed  this  same 
pledg^e."    (Polyglot  Proleg.  ch.  v.) 

My  opponent  says,  there  was  a  copy  of  the  scriptures  found,  which 
the  fingers  of  a  monk  had  never  soiled.  And  how  does  he  go  about  to 
establish  this  proposition  !  He  quoted  Home.  I  will  take  up  this 
very  work,  and  prove,  while  I  admit  that  Home  was  a  learned  writer, 
that  he  fell  into  some  very  unlearned  blunders.  But  how  does  Home 
say  that  my  friend  is  right?  He  says,  that  this  very  manuscript  was 
found  in  one  of  the  twenty-two  monasteries  of  Mount  Athos  !  !  Lo  ! 
ihere  was  a  monk  at  the  bottom  of  it  after  all  !    [Time  expired.] 

Four  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Mr.  CA.MPBELr,  rises — 

My  friends,  there  is  any  thing  but  order  in  our  discussion — ^I  mean 
logical  order,  as  respects  the  duties  of  a  respondent.  Now,  certain- 
ly, this  will  abundantly  appear  in  the  report  of  this  debate. 

The  gentleman  has  not  once,  as  yet,  replied  to  my  speeches  in  regu- 
lar sequence  ;  but,  after  the  interval  of  a  night,  a  day,  and  sometimes 
two  days,  he  responds  to  some  point  or  argument :  and  then  his  re- 
ply consists  either  in  accusing  me  of  misunderstanding,  or  misstating 
what  he  has  said ;  or  perhaps  in  denying  my  authorities,  or  by  intro- 
ducing somiB  extract,  or  tradition,  or  opinion,  from  some  great  Pro- 
testant, or  some  good  Catholic,  or  some  excogitation  of  his  own. 
His  last  speech  was  a  happy  illustration  of  Ovid's 

"  coiigestaque  eb  leiu — 
Non  bene  junctarum  discordia  seraina  reruni." 

[Metnmor.  lib.  I. 

And,  certainly,  his  mirthfulness  and  'gravity  were  in  unison  with 
the  dignity  of  his  reply ;  and  equally  fallible  as  respects  effect  of  any 
sort  upon  his  audience.  This  rhetoric  soon  wears  out.  It  is  but  an 
echo,  a  sound,  a  shadow ;  the  crisis  calls  for  something  more  solid.  But 
if  it  cannot  be  found,  I  must  submit  to  interruption,  and  turn  aside  to 
notice  the  gleanings  of  his  last  and  best  reflections  upon  the  prophecies. 

The  gentleman  has  given  us  from  his  library  some  ridiculous  puns 
upon  the  name  of  Mahomet.  He  does  not,  and  under  his  hard  desti- 
ny he  cannot,  always  discriminate  the  precise  point  in  debate.  It  is 
not  about  the  name  of  an  individual,  such  as  Ludovicus,  or  Maho- 
met; but  of  a  people — a  community — a  kingdom.  His  second  mis- 
take is,  that  if  it  were  a  personal  name,  the  number  of  the.name  of 
Mahomet  as  given  in  his  example  only  makes  502.  His  name  pro- 
perly written  is  equal  to  only  463.     He  ought  also  to  have  decipher- 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  268 

ed,  or  his  author,  whether  his  name  should  be  taken  as  it  is  written 
in  Arabic  or  in  Greek.  But  whether  he  take  it  in  Arabic  or  in  Greek, 
it  will  not  in  Grecian  numerals,  and  certainly  not  in  Arabic,  equal 
6G6.  So  fails  his  effort  at  both  reason  and  ridicule  to  dispose  of  this 
morning's  argument  from  prophecy.  I  again  repeat,  that  on  this  point, 
as  en  every  other,  my  argument  appears  unassailable. 

Yesterday  my  opponent  was  asked,  where  infallibility  resided;  to- 
day he  answers  by  asking,  where  shall  we  find  the  mind  ?  In  the 
head,  stomach,  hands,  feet,  or  where?  This  is  not  a  parallel  case. 
The  question  is,  as  usual,  mistaken,  or  misapplied.  It  is,  where  is 
the  mouth  of  infallibility  1  when  I  desire  an  infallible  response,  w^here 
shall  I  hear  it  1  Where  is  the /on^uc  of  infallibility  ?  If  the  church 
possess  infallibility  and  never  decides  a  question  by  any  organ — ne- 
ver can  utter  an  answer,  it  is  worth  no  more  than  a  diamond  in  the 
depths  of  the  Atlantic. 

The  alpha  and  omega  of  the  proofs  offered  by  the  bishop  for  the  ex 
istence  of  infallibility,  which  has  been  so  often  repeated,  and  which 
I  promised  sometime  to  notice,  is  this:  "/a/w  with  yon."  Now,  lo- 
gic asks,  what  means  "  I  am  with  you  ]"  as  proving  infallibility,  un- 
less "  I  am  with  you,"  is  a  phrase  already  incontrovertibly  established 
to  mean  infallibility.  But  what  says  bible  fact  1  There  are,  at  least,  four 
meanings  of  the  phrase.  I  am  with  you,  personally,  providentially,  gra- 
ciously, or  with  miraculous  power.  It  could  not  be  the  first :  for  he 
was  leaving  them  personally.  It  could  not  be  the  second  ;  because 
that  was  common  to  all  good  men.  Thus  God  was  with  Joseph,  with 
Jacob,  with  all  the  patriarchs,  and  with  all  good  men.  It  could  not 
be  that  God  was  to  be  with  them  graciously;  for  that  too,  is  common 
to  all  christians.  As  the  apostles  said  to  all  good  christians,  "  The  Lord 
be  with  you  all,"  it  could  not  be  a  special  promise  to  the  apostles. 
What  remains  thenl  Mark,  the  evangelist,  explains  :  "These  signs 
shall  follow.  In  my  name  shall  they  cast  out  devils:  they  shall 
speak  with  new  tongues,  serpents  shall  they  take  away;  and  if  they 
drink  any  deadly  thing  it  shall  not  hurt  them.  They  shall  impose 
hands  on  the  sick  and  they  shall  be  whole."  So  the  Rhemish  Testa- 
ment reads  Mark's  account  of  the  promise,  "  I  am  with  you."  Again  : 
after  the  ascension  of  the  Messiah,  the  evangelist  relates,  v.  20.  "  But 
they  "  (the  apostles)  "  going  forth  preached  every  where :  our  Lord 
working  with  all,  and  confirming  the  word  with  signs  that  followed." 

This,  then,  is  the  proof  of  infallibility,  as  interpreted  by  Mark  in 
the  canon  Catholic  Testament.  Now,  does  not  this  confine  the  pro- 
mise to  the  apostles  ?  Can  the  popes  work  miracles  ■?  Can  the  bish- 
ops 1 — Such  a  miracle,  forsooth,  as  the  existence  of  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic church  in  the  western  empire,  after  the  rise  of  Mahometanisra 
in  the  east !  A  splendid  miracle,  truly  !  That  proves  as  much  for 
Mahonietanism  and  Paganism,  as  for  the  popes  of  Rome :  for  all 
these  systems  rose  upon  the  ruin,  and  also  withstood  the  shocks  of 
other  systems ! 

When  Peter  said  to  the  cripple,  "  Silver  and  gold  I  have  none ;  but 
such  as  I  have  I  give  thee — In  the  name  of  Jesus  take  up  your  bed  and 
walk,"  he  felt  that  he  possessed  something  in  the  promise  "  I  am 
with  you."  Can  any  of  his  successors  speak  in  this  style :  silver 
and  gold  I  have  none :  but  such  as  I  have  (the  power  of  Christ)  I 
give  thee  ? 

The  gentleman's  dissertation  on  the  vicious  circle,  leaves  him 
X  34 


266  -DEBATE    OIV    THE 

where  it  found  him ;  believing  the  church  first  and  the  bible  after- 
wards ;  and  making  the  one  prove  the  other :  but  he  will  never  dis 
pose  of  it.  He  is  like  the  eccentric  witness,  whose  veracity  conld 
only  be  proved  by  the  principal :  and  yet  the  principal  depends  foi 
his  veracity  upon  the  witness.  The  bishop  for  a  little  while  turned 
Protestant,  and  then  he  affirmed  that  he  believed  in  Christ  on  the  ev- 
idence of  his  own  miracles;  and  that  evidence  he  found  in  the  bible, 
and  that  bible  he  interpreted  for  himself.  Thus  he  became  a  Protest* 
ant,  when  he  attempted  to  solve  that  Gordion  knot.  But  as  soon  as , 
he  had,  by  the  Protestant  rule,  obtained  faith  in  Christ,  he  instantly 
relapsed  into  the  embrace  of  holy  mother,  and  denounced  the  bridge 
over  which  he  escaped  from  the  island. 

But  the  gentleman  asked  a  question  which  has  puzzled  wise  men  to 
answer.  A  child  however  of  tour  years  old  could  have  asked  Newton 
a  question  that  he  could  not  have  answered  in  a  thousand  years, 
"How  cai  you  prove  the  biblel"  says  the  bishop.  Does  it  prove 
itself?  I  \tA\  imitate  him,  this  once,  and  ask,  does  nature  prove  it- 
self] Does  God  prove  his  own  existence  without  his  works  or  by 
his  works'?  Must  there  be  another  universe  created  to  prove  this  ? — 
This  is  a  question  no  on6  will  put,  unless  on  the  hypothesis  that  no 
man  can  prove  a  universe  to  exist  but  by  other  testimony  than  itselfl 
So  the  bible  proves  itself  to  be  the  word  of  God,  as  nature  proves  it- 
self to  be  the  work  of  God.  Thus  has  the  supreme  intelligence  st;\mp- 
ed  the  impress  of  himself  both  on  nature  and  revelation.  David  says, 
"  Lord,  thou  hast  magnified  thy  word  above  all  thy  name."  I  have 
other  reasons,  if  necessary,  to  prove  how  the  bible  was  put  together. 
Many  a  christian  has  been  made  so  by  the  single  testimony  of  one 
evangelist ;  or  by  a  single  epistle  of  Paul.  We  Imve  four  gospels; 
but  one  would  have  been  enough  ;  and  as  much  as  many  individuals 
had".  The  whole  christian  doctrine  might  be  learned  from  Paul  alone, 
from  perhaps  the  half  of  his  epistles.  Paul  and  Peter  wrote,  and  said 
much  more  by  divine  inspiration  than  is  preserved  or  recorded.  So 
did  the  ancient  prophets.  We  need  not  to  prove,  in  order  to  our  faith, 
who  collected  the  writings  into  one  volume,  any  more,  than  who  col- 
lected all  the  words  of  Christ,  that  are  reported. 

Cardinal  Bellarmine  says:  "There  is  sure  to  be  some  doctor  at 
the  head  of  a  schism."  Heresiarchs  are  generally  men  of  letters. 
Where  then  the  pertinency  of  those  remarks  about  the  unlearned  wres- 
tino-  the  scriptures'?  The  original  means  untaught,  unfradabk  persons 
rather  than  unlearned.  Philosophers,  as  they  love  to  be  called,  are 
generally  the  most  unteachable,  and  the  greatest  wresters  and  perver- 
ters  of  the  scriptures.  Peter  had  those  too  wise  to  learn,  in  his  eye, 
when  he  spoke  of  wresting  the  scripture  ;  and  not  the  simple,  honest 
and  unassuming  laity.  Let  a  man  sit  down  as  Mary  sat,  at  the  feet  of 
Christ,  and  humble  himself  as  a  pupil  ought;  he  will  then  hear  the 
voice  of  God,  and  understand  it  too.  He  will  then  discern  how  it  is, 
that  all  God's  children  are  taught  by  God,  and  that  there  is  none  that 
teacheth  like  him. 

Rather  wittily  than  logically,  the  gentleman  gives  the  moiTks  some 
credit,  for  handling  the  Alexandrine  manuscript.  Be  it  known  howev 
er,  that  monkery  began  in  St.  Anthony's  time;  and  that  this  said  copy 
is  older  than  the  founder  of  monasteries.  Because  Tacitus,  Livy,  Hor 
ace,  and  Virgil  passed  through  their  hands,  are  we  dependent  on  thecc 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  267 

for  all  our  knowledge  of  Greek  and  Roman  letters?  The  monks  handled 
copies  that  they  never  wrote.  But  that  gave  those  copies  neither 
more  nor  less  credit.  I  did  not  mean  that  one  ought  not  to  thumb  the 
scriptures  in  reading  them,  when  I  spoke  of  them  being  soiled  by  the 
hands  of  a  monk.  I  have  then,  so  far  as  objection  has  been  made,  as  I  con- 
conceive,  sustained  the  sixth  proposition.  Will  the  president  moderator 
please  have  the  5th  proposition  read  1  [The  5th  prop,  was  here  read.] 
Prop.  V.  Her  notions  of  purgatory,  indulgenres,  auricular  confession,  reniis- 
»ion  of  sins,  titinsubstantiation,  supererooation,  &c.  essential  elements  of  ncr  sys- 
tem, are  ininionil  in  their  tendency,  and  injurious  to  the  well-being  of  society, 
reiisious  and  political. 

Now,  my  friends,  I  want  to  strike  a  blow  at  the  main  root  of  the 
whole  papal  superstition  :  for  that  root  is  found  in  the  proposition  just 
now  read.  I  have  but  little  time  to  do  it,  and  shall,  therefore,  march 
right  up  to  the  point  at  once. 

The  capital,  distinguishing  doctrine-  of  Protestantism,  next  to  the 
bible  alone  as  the  rule  and  measure  of  christian  faith  and  manners, 
and  the  right  and  duty  of  all  to  read  and  examine  it  is,  that  the  death  of 
Jesus  Christ  was  not  simply  that  of  a  martyr  :  but  that  "  be  died  firr 
our  sins,  according  to  the  scriptures."  Thai  ike  death  or  sacrifice  of 
Christ  is  the  screat  sin  offering,  and  the  only  sin  offering,-'\s  a  cardinal 
doctrine  of  Protestantism  ;  and  that  there  is  now  no  priest,  nor  vic- 
tim, nor  sacrifice,  nor  altar,  nor  sin  offering  on  earth  follows,  as  a 
matter  of  course.  Jesus  was  "  the  Lamb  of  God" — "  Himself  the  sin 
offering  and  the  priest."  He  expiated  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the 
cross."  "  His  blood  cleanses  from  all  sin."  Papal  priests,  penances, 
confessions,  masses,  remissions,  purgatories,  intercessions  of  saints, 
angels,  and  almost  all  their  ceremonies,  arise  from  the  notion,  the 
radical  mistake  that  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  as  a  sin  offering,  an  atone- 
ment, a  reconciliati"''  was  some  way  deficient.  Although  we  can 
trace  supererogduon,  purgatory,  penances,  lustrations,  the  intercessions 
of  angels  and  dead  men,  &c.  to  the  philosophers  and  dreamers  of  the 
east — their  divine  Platos,  Pythagorases  and  Aristotles  :  still  the  im- 
mediate origin  and  cause  of  all  these  errors  may  be  traced  to  ignorance 
of  the  bible  doctrine  of  the  priesthood  of  Christ,  the  antitype  of  that  of 
Aaron  and  Melchisidec.  It  was  Dryden,  a  Roman  Catholic  poet,  if  I 
mistake  not,  who  said  that  the  dos  pou  sto,  which  Archimedes  sought 
in  vain  by  which  to  raise  the  globe,  was  found  by  the  popes  of  Rome 
in  the  doctrine  of  purgatory.  That  was  the  philosopher's  stone — the 
lever  which  lifts  the  world — which  has  brought  more  gold  to  Rome, 
than  the  discovery  of  America  itself. 

My  friends,  the  doctrine  of  purgatory  with  all  its  correlates  is  baf«d 
on  two  errors. 

1st.   That  man  can  do  more  than  his  duty  .• 

2d.  That  something  may  be  added  to  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  to  give  it 
mure  value  or  efficacy. 

Now,  I  affirm,  that  no  created  being,  not  a  Gabriel,  or  Uriel,  or  Raph- 
ael, or  the  highest  of  the  angelic  hosts,  can  do  an  act  of  superero- 
gation. No  man  can,  by  any  thought,  word,  or  action,  make  God  his 
debtor.  "  Who,"  says  Paul,  "  has  first  given  to  the  Lord,  and  it  shall 
be  recompensed  to  him  againl  For,  ftf  him,  and  through  him,  and  to 
him,  are  all  things."  Jesus  told  his  disciples,  that  when  they  had 
done  all  that  was  commanded  them,  they  had  jnly  done  Mieir  duty, 
and   were    to  him  unprofitable    servants.     Tiie  greatest    suint    that 


268  DEBATE    ON    THE 

ever  lived  is  not  more  holy  than  he  ought  to  be,  or  his  own  account 
This  single  thought  evaporates  that  sea  of  merit  which  has  performed 
such  wonders  in  Roman  story. 

No  human  being  has  any  thing  to  give  to  God  ;  and  therefore  none 
can  merit  from  him  any  thmg.  If  a  man's  salvation  depended  on  his 
shedding  a  single  tear,  where  could  he  find  it  ]  The  heart  that  feels 
and  the  tear  that  flows, clear  as  chrystal  down  the  cheek  of  the  most 
devoted  saint,  are  of  God's  creation.  And,  therefore,  it  is  out  of  the 
question,  to  conceive  how  any  work  of  merit,  as  respects  God,  is  pos- 
sible for  angel  or  for  man.    . 

Were  a  saint  to  turn  pilgrim  and  peregrinate  on  his  naked  kneea 
the  four  quarters  of  the  globe,  were  he  to  give  his  body  to  the  flames, 
when  God  asks  it,  or  duty  requires  it;  he  has  deserved  nothing  from 
God,  on  the  ground  of  merit.  He  has  only  employed  the  powers  that 
God  gave  him,  and  used  his  faculties  in  a  way  consonant  to  the  de- 
signs of  him  that  gave  them.  And  sooner  will  a  man  add  new  glo- 
ries to  the  sun  or  create  new  luminaries  in  the  heavens,  than  add  one 
attribute  of  merit  or  of  power  to  the  sacrifice  of  Christ.  "  He  fin- 
ished transgression  :  made  an  end  of  sin  offerings,  brought  in  an  ever- 
lasting justification;"  and  left  nothing  to  be  done  to  make  his  sacri- 
fice more  meritorious  or  eflScient. 

Works  of  supererogation,  auricular  confession,  masses  for  sins, 
transubstantiation,  purgatory,  with  all  the  appurtenances  thereto  be- 
longing, are  the  veriest  ghosts  of  paganism — the  phantoms  of  infatu- 
ated reason,  attempts  against  the  dignity  of  God  and  the  supremacy, 
as  well  as  the  true  and  proper  divinity  and  dignity  of  his  Son. 

This  superstition,  this  man  of  sin,  stands  with  his  two  fe<^t  upon 
the  two  greatest  lies  in  human  history.  He  places  his  right  foot  on 
the  first  and  his  left  foot  on  the  second.  Need  I  say  that  the  former 
aflirms  that  the  sacrifice  of  GocTs  own  Son  is  insufficient  as  a  sin  offer- 
ing :  and  that  the  latter  teaches  that  man  can  do  more  than  his  duty  to 
God.  Here  then,  I  say  to  mj'  opponent,  I  will  measure  swords  with 
him.  Let  him  meet  me  on  these  too  points,  then  it  will  be  an  easy 
task  to  dispose  of  his  imaginary  purgatories,  transubstantiation,  pen- 
ances, works  of  supererogation,  &c.  &c.  and  to  shew  that  so  far  from 
bringing  glory  to  God  or  righteousness  to  men,  they  are  positively, 
naturally,  and  necessarily  opposed  to  both.  Let  him  try  his  strength 
of  scriptural  argument  and  reason  on  these  cardinal  points,  and  it 
will,  as  our  time  is  so  far  exhausted,  save  the  tediousness  of  nume- 
'rous  details. — [Time  expired.] 

ffalf-patit  4  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Purceli-  risps — 

My  friends,  it  is  imperative  upon  me  to  make  one  exposition  before 
I  proceed.  Many  of  you  were  here  when  my  friend  would  have  led 
you  into  a  gross  mistake,  respecting  the  Catholic  church,  by  quoting 
a  pretended  extract  from  Liguori.  I  asserted  then,  that  nothing  coula 
be  found  in  that  writer's  works  to  substantiate  the  odious  charge,  to 
give  it  so  much  as  a  semblance  of  truth.  I  have  now  before  me  the 
entire  works  of  Liguori,  and  I  have  placed  them  in  the  presence  of 
my  friend,  Mr.  Campbell.  Th^9th  volume  has  an  index,  containing 
every  word  of  any  impo;  tance,  and  I  repeat,  that  after  a  search  through 
the  whole  nine  volumes,  nothing  like  the  quotation  of  last  ei^ening  can 
ht  found.     I  have  now  placed  the  book  in  the  hands  of  Professor 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  269 

Biggs,  of  Lane  seminary,  one  of  the  moderators,  and  a  Protestant  of 
the  Presbyterian  denomination,  if  I  do  not  mistake,  and  I  will  leave 
it  to  him,  or  any  other  mtelligent  and  candid  man,  to  say  to  you 
whether  the  fact  is  as  my  friend  has  stated,  or  the  very  contrary  of 
what  he  has  stated. 

Mr.  Campbell.     Be  so  good  as  to  explain  the  matter  fully. 

Bishop  Purcell.  I  will  explain  the  exact  stale  of  the  case.  Mr. 
Smith,  the  author  of  the  translation,  from  whom  my  friend  read  this, 
as  well  as  many  other  things,  has  given  a  false  quotation,  and  made 
Liguori  say,  what  he  never  said.  The  facts  are  these :  a  canon  of  the 
council  of  Trent,  and  Liguori,  according  to  the  canon,  say,  "  that  if 
a  priest  falls  by  criminal  intercourse,  as  specified,  from  the  holy 
state  of  purity,  to  which  he  is  bound  by  a  voluntary,  deliberate,  and 
solemn  vow,  he  shall  be  deprived  of  a  large  portion  of  his  salary  for 
the  first  offence.  If  he  does  not  refrain  after  admonition  and  such 
punishment,  he  is  again  admonished,  and  deprived  of  his  whole  salary, 
and  suspended  from  all  his  functions  as  a  priest  in  the  Catholic  church. 
But  after  the  third  admonition,  if  he  is  still  incorrigible,  he  is  excom- 
municated, and  cut  off  from  the  church,  even  as  St.  Paul  cut  off  thfe 
incestuous  man  of  Corinth."  1st.  Ep.  Corinth,  ch.  5.  v.  5.  No  where, 
in  any  part  of  these  volumes,  is  it  said  that  a  priest  may  sin  thus  upon 
paying  a  fine,  &c. 

Thus,  my  friends,  you  see  how  the  poisonous  fountains  of  error  and 
prejudice  have  been  swelling  over  the  land,  and  infecting  the  public 
mind,  until  many  an  honest  and  upright  man  has  thought,  when  he 
denounced  us  for  our  (imputed)  doctrines,  he  was  doing  God  a  service. 
Were  he  aware  of  the  imposition  practised  on  his  credulity,  he  would, 
I  have  no  doubt,  have  turned  his  indignation  on  more  deserving  victims. 
"  ^  we  leave  off  slandering  them,^^  said  the  ministers  of  Amsterdam, 
to  Vossius,  who  remonstrated  with  them  on  their  injustice  to  the  Ca- 
tholics, "  our  people  will  soon  leave  us."  "  We  shall  do  no  good  with  the 
people  "  said  Shaftesbury,  speaking  of  the  Mocedo  plot,  "  if  tve  cannot 
make  them  swallow  greater  nonsense  than  this.^^  "  Thou  shall  not  bear  false 
witness  against  thy  neighbor"  is  a  commandment  which  Maria  Monk 
and  her  reverend  protectors  reckon  not  to  belong  to  the  "  weightier 
things  of  the  law."  Their  stale  calumnies  are  paid  for  with  the  blood- 
money  !  Our  doctrine,  many  of  its  ministerial  adversaries  know  to  be 
pnre  and  holy;  but,  overwhelmed  with  confusion,  whenever  they  ati- 
tempt  argument,  they  have  no  resource  but  in  addressing  themselves 
to  the  prejudices  of  their  implicit  believers.  These  mock  at  Catholics 
for  "hearing  the  church  ;"  and  whom  do  they  hear? 

As  to  the  bible,  the  whole  difficulty  is  to  be  gone  over  again  and 
again.  Every  new  translation,  it  seems,  lies  open  to  objections  on 
grave  and  important  grounds.  I  have  here  a  paper,  printed  at  Kana- 
wha, in  Cabell  county,  Virginia.  In  it  a  considerable  class  of  Bap- 
tists, I  think  they  are,  quarrel  with  their  brethren  near  Zoar,  in  Ohio, 
and  quarrel  with  the  bible.  They  insist  that  all  the  existing  transla- 
tions of  it  should  be  rejected,  and  a  new  one  .commenced  for  them- 
selves from  the  original  Hebrew  and  Greek  scriptures — if  they  get 
them  !  They  can  never  get  a  bible  they  are  sure  of.  They  cannot  get 
the  original  Hebrew  in  which  the  gospel  of  St.  Matthew  was  written. 
St.  Jerome  says  he  had  seen  it,  and  that  is  all  we  know  of  it  since. 
They  cannot  in  twelve  months  of  the  time  that  the  getting  up  of  their 
bible  will  require,   determine,   on   grounds  sutis  fact  cry  to  a  biblical 


270  DEBATE    ON    THE 

critic,  and  on  Protestant  principles,  why  they  adopt  or  reject,  as  the 
event  may  be,  the  seventh  verse,  of  the  fifth  chapter,  of  the  1st  Epistle 
of  St.  John. 

While  this  paper  was  being  printed  at  Charleston,  Virginia,  the 
"  Churchman,"  at  New  York,  perhaps  at  the  same  hour,  was  printing 
the  very  proof  1  have  read  to  you,  in  favor  of  the  Catholic  doctrine  of 
confession.  Let  the  Burmese  and  all  others.  Pagans  or  Christians, 
lie  on  their  oars,  till  the  new  scriptures  appear.  Then  let  printets, 
agf  its  and  missionaries,  be  well  paid,  and  the  cumbrous  machinery 
Bet  to  work,  and  compass  heaven  and  earth  to  make  one  proselyte, 
who  surely  cannot  be  more  settled  in  his  faith  than  they  who  thus  de 
spise  the  "  inspired,  authoritative,  perpetual,  catholic,  perfect  and  in 
telligible  rule." 

He  says  the  documents  I  have  read  are  not  pertinent.  Now  he  cer- 
tainly did  not  suspect  that  I  thought  he  would  so  consider  them.  In  his 
estimation,  there  is  nothing  pertinent,  logical,  relevant,  in  all  this  dis- 
cussion, but  what  he  says  himself.  This  he  has  neglected  no  oppor- 
tunity of  impressing  on  our  attention.  But  the  public  will  be  the  best 
judge,  and  they  can  see  through  the  attempts  of  either  disputant  to 
forestall  their  impartial  and  unbiassed  verdict.  The  printed  report  of 
this  controversy,  will  shew  the  pertinency  or  impertinency  of  our  re- 
spective arguments,  and,  for  my  own  part,  I  have  not  the  slightest  feai 
of  the  result. 

I  am  very  far  from  believing  that  I  am  worthy  .of  advocating  the 
holy  cause,  in  which  my  humble  talents,  and  all  my  heart's  affections 
are  enlisted,  but  such  is  my  confidence  in  the  power  of  that  truth, 
which  I  embraced  on  conviction  as  soon  as  I  was  able  to  judge  for 
myself,  and  whose  evidences  have  been,  ever  since,  brightening  to  my 
understanding,  the  more  I  examine  them,  that  I  ask  no  more  than  that 
my  unadorned  arguments  should  fall  into  the  hands  of  thinking  men. 

My  opponent  says  that  the  whole  structure  of  Catholicism  is  an  as- 
sumption, and  rests  upon  two  lies.  The  gentleman  pledged  himself  at 
the  commencement  of  this  debate,  to  use  no  opprobrious  language,  and 
I  promised  not  to  set  him  the  example.  How  he  has  kept  his  word, 
as  the  terms  in  which  his  propositions  are  expressed  are  so  very  re- 
fined, let  these,  by  which  they  are  defended,  decide.  I  will  not  bandy 
epithets  with  him,  but  I  must  say  that  the  Catholic  church  has  two 
sound  legs  to  stand  upon.  The  gentleman  tenders  her  crutches  which 
she  modestly  declines,  with  the  suggestion  that  as  his  argument  is 
lame  he  may  have  occasion  for  them  himself!  I  will  argue  these  va- 
rious doctrines  which  he  has  enumerated  and  prove  them  all  to  be 
founded  in  the  bible,  and  believed,  in  all  past  ages,  from  the  time  of 
Christ  and  his  apostles.  The  gentleman  has  misrepresented,  or  he 
does  not  understand  our  doctrine.  We  believe  that  there  is  no  other 
name  under  heaven,  but  the  name  of  Jesus  given  to  men,  whereby 
they  may  be  saved.  Acts  iv.  12.  We  believe  that  "%  one  oblation 
Christ  hath  perfected  firr  ever  them  that  are  sanctijied"  Heb.  x.  14. 
That  atonement  by  His  vicarious  sacrifice,  if  not  the  first,  is  one  of  the 
great  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  no  man  who 
pretends  to  any  acquaintance  with  that  doctrine,  will,  or  can  venture 
to  deny.  Christ  has  paid  an  all-sufficient  price  for  our  ransom.  But 
do  we  arraign  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  of  insufficiency,  when  we  sanc- 
tify the  Sabbath,  when  we  give  alms  to  the  poor,  when  we  abstain  from 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGION,  271 

evil,  Wiien  we  hear  preaching,  or  go  to  prayer  1  When  St.  Paul  chas- 
tised his  body  and  brought  it  under  subjection,  lest,  while  he  preached 
to  others  he  should  himself  become  a  reprobate,  did  he  believe  Christ's 
sacrifice  incomplete  1  that  it  needed  his  supplementary  austerities? 
Or  that  the  other  Apostles  should  command  us,  to  make  sure  our  election 
and  vocation  by  good  works ;  to  work  out  our  salvation  with  fear  s  nd 
trembling?  No;  God  who  made  us  without  ourselves,  will  not  save  us 
without  ourselves.  He  requires  our  co-operation,  and  with  his  afrace 
he  aids  our  weak  endeavor.  This  grace  he  communicates  to  us  by  divers 
channels,  and  in  various  ways.  Of  these  the  principal  are  the  seven  sa 
craments,  which,  if  I  may  use  the  gentleman's  figure  in  its  proper  appli 
cation,  like  the  seven  mouths  of  the  Nile  convey  the  healing  waters  from 
the  fountains  of  the  Savior  to  every  portion  of  the  church.  The  will 
is  made  and  recorded.  The  executors,  the  apostles  and  priests  of  the 
church,  convey  and  apply  an  adequate  portion  to  the  wants  of  men. 
Wherever  a  captive  may  be  presumed  to  groan  in  spiritual  slavery, 
they  seek  him  out,  they  proclaim  to  him  the  glad  tidings  of  his  deliv 
erance,  they  pay,  with  the  treasures  of  Christ,  of  which  they  are  th«) 
depositaries,  the  price  of  his  ransom  ;  and  this  when  they  find  the  slave 
willing  to  accept  the  terms  on  which  redemption  is  offered,  do  they 
carry  into  effect,  in  his  behalf,  the  charitable  intentions  of  the  divine 
testator.  Is  this  arraigning  his  bounty,  or  distributing  it  as  he  com- 
manded ?  Is  this  robbing  Christ  of  his  glory,  or  calling  all  nations  to 
bask  in  its  rays  and  exult  in  its  effulgence?-  The  Catholic  church,  in 
all  the  institutions  she  venerates,  the  sacraments  she  administers,  the 
truths  she  proclaims,  the  sacrifices  she  offers,  the  prayers  she  prefers, 
the  charity  she  inculcates,  the  grace  she  dispenses,  acts  by  the  com- 
mand of  Christ,  in  the  name  of  Christ.  This  is  the  true  and  living  tvay 
by  which  she  commands  all  to  seek  access  to  the  Father,  and  by  Him, 
with  Him,  and  in  Him,  to  give  to  God  all  honor  and  glory  forever. 
He  is  the  sun  of  the  entire  system,  and  all  the  ordinances  of  religion, 
are  but  the  rays  of  that  sun  enlightening  and  vivifying  the  christian 
pilgrim  at  every  step  of  his  weary  progress  through  this  vale  of  tears. 
Sacrifice,  we  consider  indispensable  to  religion.  It  has  been  offered 
to  God  in  every  age,  by  every  people,  under  every  form  of  religion. 
Abel  offered  sacrifice  in  Eden,  the  purest  firstlings  of  his  flocks,  for  he 
was  a  shepherd.  Cain  sacrificed  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  for  he  was  a 
husbandman.  Noah,  wh6n  the  waters  of  the  deluge  had  subsidecf, 
Solomon,  when  he  dedicated  .the  temple,  offered  sacrifices  ;  even  the 
Pagan  nations  of  the  earth,  who  changed  the  glory  of  the  incorruptible 
God,  into  the  likeness  of  the  image  of  corruptible  man,  and  of  birds, 
and  of  four-footed  b'^asts,  paid  homage  to  this  dictate  of  nature,  and 
continued  the  rite  of  sacrifice,  however  unworthy  the  objects  of  idola- 
try From  all  this  we  rightly  infer,  that  the  only  perfect  religion 
should  not  be  destitute  of  sacrifice.  The  scripture  everywhere  testi- 
fies to  its  necessity.  Melchisedec,  as  we  read  in  Genesis,  offered 
bread  and  wine.  He  was  a  priest  of  the  most  High  God.  And  David, 
in  the  109th  Psalm,  says  of  Jesus  Christ,  King  of  Justice,  King  of 
Peace,  "The  Lord  hath  sworn,  and  it  shall  not  repent  him,  thou  art  a 
priest  forever  according  to  the  order  of  Melchisedec."  When  God 
abrogates  the  Jewish  dispensation,  and  substitutes  a  new  and  better  in 
its  stead,  he  says  to  the  Jews,  by  the  last  of  all  the  prophets,  "  I  have 
no  pleasure  in  you,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts ;  and  I  will  not  receive  a  gifl 


272  DEBATE    OJI    THE 

of  your  hand  ,•  for  from  the  rising  of  th^t  sun  even  to  the  going  down,  otj 
name  is  great  among  the  Gentiles,  and  in  every  place  there  is  a  satrifce,* 
and  there  is  offered  to  my  name  a  clean  oblation  ,■  for  my  name  is  great 
among  the  Gentiles,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts."  Malachias,  ch.  11,  6.  v. 
When  Jesus  Christ,  as  we  read  in  three  Evangelists,  instituted  the 
Blessed  Eucharist,  he  said  to  his  apostles,  "  This  my  body,  which  ia 
offered  for  you.  This  is  my  blood,  which  is  shed  for  you.  Do  this  in  com- 
memoration  of  me." 

Catholics  obey  the  injunctions  of  the  Savior,  they  do  what  he  com- 
manded them,  they  offer  the  memorial  sacrifice,  they  continue  and  re- 
present the  sacrifice  of  Jesus  Christ  upon  Calvary.  They  offer  it 
under  the  forms  of  bread  and  wine  as  Melchisedec  had  done  in  figure. 
They  offer  it  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  to  the  going  down  thereof, 
as  Malachy  had  predicted.  On  Asia''s  distant  plains,  under  the  burn- 
ing sun  of  Africa,  in  the  tangled  forests  of  the  western  world,  as  well 
as  in  its  new  and  blooming  cities,  the  sacrifice  is  offered  and  the  pro- 
phecy obtains  its  glorious  accomplishment.  If  Protestants  say  they 
have  the  sacrifice  of  the  death  of  Christ,  I  answer  with  our  divines, 
so  had  the  servants  of  God,  under  the  law  of  nature  and  the  written 
law;  for  it  is  impossible  that  with  the  blood  of  oxen  and  goats,  sin 
should  be  taken  away;  nevertheless  they  had  perpetual  sacrifices  to 
represent  the  death  of  Christ,  and  to  apply  the  fruits  of  it  to  their  souls. 
In  the  same  manner  the  Catholics  have  Christ  himself  really  present, 
and  mystically  offered  on  their  altars  daily,  for  the  same  ends. 

If  time  permitted,  I  might  call  up  in  review  before  you  those  vener- 
able bishops  and  doctors  whose  blood  sealed  the  doctrine,  which  their 
writings  had  defended.  The  saint  Johns  and  the  Polycarps  of  the  east 
— the  Irenaeuses  and  the  Hilaries  of  the  west — those  venerable  men 
whose  great  age,  like  that  of  the  patriarchs  of  old,  enabled  them  to 
transmit  to  their  children  without  fear  of  error,  or  multiplying  tod 
much  the  intermediate  links — ^the  traditionary  chain  of  their  own  and 
their  forefathers'  belief — what  they  believed  and  taught  themselves 
and  what  was  daily  practised  in  those  old  centurial  churches 
which  we  have  inherited  from  them,  built  many  ages  before  any  of 
the  modern  dissentient  religions  were  known,  and  where  the  altar  and 
the  cross,  the  liturgjr'and  the  stone  from  the  wall,  bore  testimony  to 
the  real  presence  in  the  Eucharist,  to  the  divinity  of  the  victim  that 
was  offered  there  in  sacrifice  ! — [Time  expired.] 


FRIDAY,  January  20.    Half  past  9  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Mil  Campbell  rises — 

I  Jid  not,  in  first  taking  up  "  The  Synopsis  of  the  Moral  Theology 
of  the  Roman  Church,"  say  augrht  of  its  author,  or  of  the  causes  which 
ushered  it  into  existence.  But  since  it  has  become  a  matter  of  so 
much  debate,  1  shall  state  a  few  things  concerning  it  and  its  author, 
Mr.  Smith,  the  author,  was  a  member  of  that  community  for  seventeen 
years,  several  of  which  he  officiated  as  a  priest.  Convinced  of  the 
errors  of  that  superstition,  he  publicly  renounced  it,  and  is  now  a  Pro- 
testant minister,  greatly  devoted  to  the  cause  of  Protestantism.    From 


ROMAN    CAXnOLIC    RELIGION.  273 

his  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  institution,  he  has  recently  translated  a  considerable  portion 
of  the  works  of  Saint  Ligori.     The  title  of  the  book  is  : 

'*  A  synopsis  of  the  moral  theolog-}'  of  the  church  of  Rome,  taken  from  th« 
works  of  St.  Ligori  and  translated  from  the  Latin  into  English  by  Samuei^  B 
Smith,  late  a  popish  priest."     New  York,  1836. 

It  is  further  explained  in  the  preface  : 

"  What  we  present  before  the  public  in  this  synopsis,  is  a  compendious  vitw 
of  the  doctrine  of  the  church  of  Rome,  now  taught  in  all  her  schools.  It  is  a 
fair  and  exact  translation  of  selected  portions  of  the  voluminous  MoHAI.  Theo* 
tJDGTi  of  St.  Alphonsus  de  Ligorio,  published  at  Mechlin  in  Belgium,  superiO' 
rum  permissii,  in  the  year  1828."     [Preface,  p.  5. 

Of  its  autjior  he  speaks  thus : 

•■He  was  enrolled  among  the  saints,  as  the  title  page  of  his  work  declares,  by 
pope  Pius  VII.  on  the  15th  of  September,  in  the  year  1816."     [Pref.  p.  6. 

It  seems  that  this  work  is  so  popular,  as  to  be  found  in  almost 
•very  priest's  library,  and  is  quoted  by  ihem,  as  of  the  highest  au- 
thority. 

"Uesidea  the  above  testimony  in  confirmation  of  the  authority  of  St.  Ligon, 
we  have  also  that  of  the  Rev.  father  Valera  himself,  the  popish  priest  of  the  city 
of  New  York.  This  Rev.  father  Felix  Valera,  about  a  year  and  a  half  ago,  in 
his  attempt  at  a  refutation  of  my"  i  enunciation  of  popery,"  quotes  this  very 
same  Ligori  as  overwhelming  and  decisive  authority  against  something  which 
he  found  advanced  by  me."     [Pref.  p.  9. 

In  some  very  important  matters,  he  has  given  the  original  itself; 
and  fearing,  as  the  manner  is,  that  his  translation  might  be  called  in 
question,  he  says : 

"  If  they  deny  that  we  have  given  a  fair  translation,  we  will  then  challenge 
them  to  come  forward  in  a  public  assembly  with  the  works  of  St.  Ligori,  when 
we  promise  to  meet  them,  and  submit  our  translation,  and  the  original,  to  the 
inspection  of  a  committee,  one  half  of  whom  to  be  chosen  by  ourselves,  and  the 
other  half  by  the  Roman  clergy.  Truth  never  shuns  investigation.  If  we  have 
not  given  a  fair,  genuine,  and  true  translation,  and  if  we  have  not  exhibited  the 
doctrines  of  Ligori  and  the  church  of  Rome  fairly  and  correctly,  witliout  gar-' 
bling,  or  giving  an  erroneous  construction,  we  will  be  willing  to  incur  the  con- 
sequences that  we  ought  to  expect,  for  having  deceived  the  public."  Synop. 
Pref.  p.  12. 

I  have  given  but  a  sample  of  this  work,  though  I  have  made  numer- 
ous quotations  ;  only  one  of  which  has  been  challenged  by  my  antag 
onist.  That  point  I  touched  as  lightly  as  possible,  because  unsuited 
to  a  popular  assembly.  This  the  gentleman  fully  understands.  1 
slurred  it  over,  in  terms  the  least  intelligible  which  I  could  select  at 
the  moment :  but  he  has  no  reason  to  object  even  to  the  comment,  that 
Mr.  Smith  puts  upon  the  article  quoted.  He  well  knows  that  mar- 
riage in  the  priesthood  is  instant  excommiinication  ;  while  concubin- 
age is  matter  of  forbearance.  In  the  course  of  this  discussion,  I  had 
occasion  to  observe,  that  I  found  very  many  canons  of  the  church,  even 
in  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries,  on  the  subject  of  marriage  and  its 
abuses.  This,  from  the  modesty  of  my  exposition,  he  took  occasion 
to  use  in  argument,  as  proof  that  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy  was  early 
introduced.  This  was  a  perversion  of  my  observation,  which  the  deli- 
cacy of  my  situation  would  not  allow  me  to  explain.  Nor  will  I  now 
sin  against  my  own  feelings,  or  those  of  my  audience,  by  going  fully 
into  such  details.  I  will  only  add,  that  I  have  a  superfluity  of  evi- 
dence in  proof  of  the  allegation  of  Ligori.  The  casuistry,  dissimula- 
tion, and  immorality  of  the  Jesuits,  and  the  whole  genius  of  the  inter- 
nal spirit  of  the  papacy,  are  abundantly  attested  in  the  two  works  ly- 
ing before  me :  "  The  Provincial  Letters,"  of  the  accomplished  Pas* 

18 


274  DEBATE   OI»   THE 

chal,  which  I  have  not  yet  opened  in  this  discussion;  and,  "The 
Secreta  Monita  of  the  order  of  Jesus."  This  copy,  in  the  original 
French,  I  am  informed  by  the  lady  tnrough  whose  kindness  I  have 
been  furnished  with  it,  was  brought  to  this  country  by  the  secretary 
of  the  great  and  renowned  La  Fayette,  on  his  last  visit  to  the  United 
States.  This;  our  national  benefactor,  who,  my  opponent  says,  was 
a  true  Catholic,  has  declared,  that  if  our  liberty  should  be  lost,  it  will 
be  by  the  hands  of  priests.  I  saw  this  fact  stated  in  two  papers  ;  one 
published  in  Richmond,  the  other  in  New-York ;  and  1  have  no  doubl 
of  its  correctness. 

The  Secreta  Monita  has  been  a  few  years  since,  translated  at  Prin- 
ceton N.  J.  and  is  now  found  in  many  book-stores  in  this  country. 
From  the  perusal  of  these  two  volumes,  we  shall  find  that  the  moral 
theology  of  St.  Ligori,  the  doctrine  of  Smith's  Synopsis,  is  in  per- 
fect unison  with  the  true  ^irit  of  the  Roman  clergy  and  institution. 

The  gentleman  mentioned  the  disclosures  of  Maria  Monk.  I  did 
not ;  because  I  rely  on  no  such  documents.  What  she  says,  is  private 
property ;  and  there  is  no  occasion  for  bringing  it  into  this  contro- 
versy. I  have  my  own'  opinion  of  it  however :  but  need  not  its  aid 
on  this  occasion. 

The  gentleman  speaks  often  of  the  imperfections  and  difficulties 
of  Protestant  translations  of  the  bible.'  He  says  that  we  Protestants 
are  in  a  deplorable  state ;  always  making  new  translations,  and  never, 
or  not  long  satisfied  with  any  of  them  :  and  seems  to  sympathize  with 
us,  as  if  we  were  without  the  scriptures.  This  pretended  condolence, 
I  only  notice  because  it  gives  me  an  opportunity  to  repeat  with  em- 
phasis, that  his  church,  with  all  her  pretended  infallibility,  cannot  pro- 
duce a  trafislation  of  any  sort,  in  any  living  language  on  earth  !  With 
all  the  riches,  and  learning,  and  infallibility  of  the  Roman  hierarchy ; 
she  owns  not  an  English  New  Testament,  authentic  or  authorized 
either  by  pope  or  council,  or  the  church  diffusive  or  responsive.  How 
supremely  ridiculous,  therefore,  for  the  gentleman  to  talk  of  Protes- 
tant translations,  as  imperfect !  How  does  he  infallibly  know  that 
any  one  of  them  is  imperfect?  Two  infallible  editions  of  the  Latin 
vulgate  have  been  made  by  the  authority  of  two  popes,  not  thirty 
years  distant  from  each  other ;  and  yet  they  differ  in  more  than  2000 
places  !!!  Sixtus  V.  issued  a  bull,  with  an  anathema,  against  any 
man  that  would  change  his  authorized  vulgate,  even  in  the  least  par- 
ticle, (in  minima  particula,)  yet,  Clement  VIH.  had  the  audacity, 
in  despite  of  said  bull,  to  order  a  new  translation,  and  did  accomplish 
it,  changing  it  more  than  2000  times,  and  sometimes  very  seriously, 
to  the  amount  of  clauses,  and  whole  verses,  as  Dr.  James  in  his  BeU 
turn  Papale  has  amply  testified.  Thus  the  Clementine  vulgate,  under 
the  solemn  curse  of  the  Sixtine  bull,  carries  upon  it  the  seal  of  infal- 
libility! 

I  now  invite  attention  to  the  subject  of  yesterday  evening.  I  then 
endeavorfed  to.  state,  as  briefly  as  I  could,  the  two  fundamental  errors 
on  which  the  Man  of  sin  stands.  The  first, — That  the  sacrifice  of  Je- 
sus Christ  was  not  alone  sufficient,  to  put  away  sin ;  and  the  second^ 
—That  persons  can  do  more  than  their  duty.  To  provoke  discussion 
on  these  two  great  doctrinal  lies,  I  stated  that  all  the  p^3culiar  doc- 
trines of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  viz.  penance,  purgatory,  tran- 
substautiation,  and  all  this  priestly  sacrifice,  confession,  &c.  were 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIOIOIT.  275 

built  upon  these  two  doctrinal  lies.     I  ^all  not  further  discuss  tha> 
subject,  till  the  gentleman  agrees  to  meet  me  there. 

Again,  It  is  a  doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  that  the 
"  intention'^  of  the  priest,  in  every  act  of  worship  and  consecration, 
is  essential  to  the  validity  of  that  act — that  is,  that  unless  the  person 
ordaining  a  priest  intend  to  ordain  him,  all  that  is  done,  is  of  no  vali 
dity,  however  exact  the  form ;  because  he  did  not  intend  in  his  heart, 
to  ordain  him  !  So,  in  consecrating  a  wafer,  without  such  intention^ 
its  nature  is  not  changed ;  and  the  reception  of  it,  of  no  value.  Such 
intention  is  essential  to  every  act  of  religion,  in  which  a  priest  offi- 
eiates.  The  efficacy  of  all  ordinances,  is  therefore  resolved  into  "  the 
ntention  of  the  priest."  He  that  denies  the  necessity  of  this  inten- 
tion, according  to  the  council  of  Trent,  "  is  to  be  anathema."  This 
is  therefore,  one  of  the  essential  doctrines  of  the  church  as  necessary 
tj  salvation,  as  the  gospel  itself;  for  the  rejection  of  it  incurs  as 
solemn  a  curse  as  any  one  of  the  hundred  anathemas  which  the  coun- 
cil of  Trent  pronounced  in  confirmation  of  its  decrees.  The  only 
time,  the  word  anathema  is  used  by  Paul  in  the  sense  of  a  curse  is 
in  his  letter  to  the  Galatians,  in  respect  of  corrupting  the  gospel. 
This  then,  is  as  essential  as  the  gospel.  Who  then,  let  me  ask, 
can  have  faith  in  any  of  the  ceremonies  or  ordinances,  or  consecra- 
tions of  Rome  ?  Can  any  one  know  the  intention  in  the  heart  of 
a  priest  or  bishop  ]  Nay,  indeed,  bishop  Purcell  never  can  prove 
to  any  mortal,  that  he  is  truly  ordained :  nor  can  any  one  have  any 
faith  in  his  services  as  a  bishop,  unless  he  know  all  hearts,  from 
Peter's  time  till  now,  and  could  show  that  the  intention  was  never 
wanting  from  the  apostolic  age  till  now,  in  the  ancestorial  official 
lines.  This  doctrine  lays  the  axe  at  the  root  of  all  certainty  in 
every  part  of  the  Roman  Catholic  religion  :  for  in  the  judgment  of 
that  church  multitudes  of  her  clergy  have  proved  hypocrites  and  im- 
postors, in  whose  intentions  at  any  previous  time,  there  can  there- 
fore be  no  faith.  So  far  as  Protestants  are  concerned,  their  principles 
are  perfectly  free  from  this  incertitude.  Every  Protestant  feels  the 
most  perfect  certainty  in  submitting  to  the  ordinances  of  religion.  The 
Protestant  minister  knows  and  teaches  that  the  ordinance  receives  no 
saving  or  salutary  efficacy  from  his  intentions,  or  his  hands.  Per- 
sons, who  in  faith  and  piety  receive  them,  know  that  they  receive  all 
the  efficacy  of  the  ordinance,  independent  of  any  special  virtue  in  hjim 
that  does  administer  them. 

On  the  subject  of  indulgences  I  shall  touch  but  lightly,  for  the 
want  of  time.  The  rich  and  profitable  trade,  which  has  been  carried 
on  by  Rome  in  the  sale  of  this  single  article  of  her  merchandize 
is  as  public  as  her  name.  The  conspicuity  of  this  subject  as  connect- 
ed with  the  Protestant  Reformation  is  as  familiar  as  the  names  of  Lu- 
ther and  Tetzel.  It  is  a  sprout  from  the  root  of  supererogation,  from 
the  doctrine  of  human  merit — that  immense  bank  of  which  the  clergy 
are  directors.  The  intolerable  abuses  of  that  board  of  directors  was 
the  piincfum  saiiens  of  the  Protestant  Reformation.  Pope  Leo  X 
president  in  that  day,  wanted  to  pay  off  some  sixty  million  of  dollars, 
incurred  and  being  incurred  for  the  splendid  edifice  of  St.  Peters  at 
Rome.  He  published  a  plenary  remission  of  past  sins,  and  an  indul- 
gence to  all  contributing  to  this  splendid  undertaking.  As  a  matter  of 
curiosity  and  of  edification,  we  shall  here  read  the  form  of  these  in- 
dulgences. 


276  DEBATE    OM    THE 

"  May  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  have  mercy  upon  thee,  and  absolve  thee  by  the 
merits  of  his  most  holy  passion.  And  I,  by  his  authority,  that  of  his  blessea 
apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  and  that  of  the  most  holy  pope,  granted  and  conmiit- 
ted  to  me  in  these  parts,  do  absolve  thee,  first  from  all  ecclesiastical  censure,  in 
whatever  manner  they  have  been  incurred,  then  from  all  ihy  sins,  transgres- 
sions, and  excesses,  how  enormous  soever  they  may  be;  even  from  such  as  are 
reserved  for  the  cognizance  of  the  holy  see,  and  as  far  as  the  keys  of  the  holy 
church  extend.  I  remit  to  you  all  punishment  which  you  deserve  in  purgatory 
on  their  account;  and  I  restore  you  to  the  holy  sacraments  of  the  church,  to  the 
unity  of  the  faithful,  and  to  that  innocence  and  purity  which  you  possessed  at 
baptism:  so  that  when  you  die,  the  gates  of  punishment  shall  be  shut,  and  the 
gates  of  paradise  shall  be  opened;  and  if  you  shall  not  die  at  present,  this  grace 
shall  remain  in  full  force,  when  you  are  at  the  point  of  deatli.  In  the  name  of 
the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Giiost."  [Controversy  between  Messrs. 
Hughes  and  Breckenridge,  p.  24^. 

All  we  have  said  with  regard  to  the  power  and  pretensions  of  Rome 
in  granting  indulgences,  is  substantiated,  and  more  than  substanti- 
ated by  this  document,  for  in  anticipation  of  the  future,  even  to  death, 
and  in  death,  the  absolving  power,  or  grace,  was  to  continue.  I  will 
also  add,  the  doctrine  of  the  creed  of  pope  Pius  IV. 

"The  council  of  Trent  teaches  that  "  wiioever  shall  affirm  that  when  the 
grace  of  justification  is  received,  the  otfence  of  the  penitent  sinner  is  so  forgiv- 
en, and  the  sentence  of  eternal  punishment  so  reversed,  that  there  remains  no 
temporal  punishment  to  be  endured,  before  his  entrance  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  either  in  this  world,  or  in  the  future  state  in  purgatory:  let  him  be  ac- 
cursed."    Id.  ib.  same  p. 

Perhaps  we  should  also  hear,  in  this  place,  the  council  of  Trent : 

It  is  also  an  article  of  faith  in  the  creed  of  Pius  IV.  "  that  the  power  of  in- 
dulgences was  left  by  Christ  to  his  church,  and  that  the  use  of  them  is  very  help- 
ful to  christian  people."     [Ground  of  Catholic  Doc.  p.  71.  72. 

Once  more : 

Bellarmine,  that  great  cardinal  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church  (to  show  that 
he  died  in  the  faith  he  willed  half  of  his  soul  to  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the  othet 
half  to  her  son) — Bellarmine  in  his  book  on  iudulgences  heads  the  second  and 
third  chapters  thus:  "  That  there  exists  a  certain  treasury  in  the  church,  which 
is  the  foundation  of  indulgences;  that  the  church  has  the  power  of  applying  this 
treasury  of  satisfactions,  iind  thus  of  granting  indulgences." 

I  Will  not  branch  out  on  this  subject  farther,  unless  the  gentleman 
agrees  to  meet  me  on  the  facts  and  documents  just  now  submitted.  To 
prove  the  immoral  tendency  of  such  indulgences,  would,  indeed,  be  a 
work  of  supererogation,  if  such  a  work  were  at  all  possible. 

On  the  subject  of  transubstantiation,  the  creed  of  pope  Pius  IV.  de- 
cides as  follows : 

Article  xvi.  "  I  do  also  profess,  that  in  the  mass  there  is  offered  unto  God  a  true 
proper,  and  propitiatory  sacrifice  lor  the  quick  and  the  dead;  and  that,  in  th» 
most  holy  sacrament  of  the  holy  eucharist,  there  is  truly,  really,  and  substantially 
the  body  and  blood,  together  with  the  soul  and  the  divinity  of  our  Lord  Jesuj 
Christ;  and  that  there  is  a  conversion  made  of  the  whole  substance  of  the  bread 
into  the  body,  and  of  the  whole  substance  of  the  wine  into  the  blood;  which 
conversion  the  holy  Catholic  church  calls  Transubstamiation." 

'•The  church  of  Rome  declares  that,  upon  the  priest's  pronouncing  these 
words,  hoc  est  corpus  meum,  (this  is  my  body,)  the  bread  and  wine  in  the  eu- 
charist are  instantly  transubstantiated  into  the  natural  body  and  blood  of  Christ; 
the  species  or  accidents  only  of  the  bread  and  wine  remaining.  Christ  is  offered 
as  often  as  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass  is  celebrated.  Solitary  masses,  wherein  the 
priest  communicates  alone,  are  approved  and  commended;  and  the  council  of 
Trent  declares  that  whosoever  saith  they  are  unlawful  and  ought  to  be  abrogat- 
ed or  abolished,  is  accursed."  [View  of  All  Religions,  compiled  aud  selected 
from  the  best  authorities  by  Thomas  Robbins,  minister  of  the  gospel  in  east 
Windsor,  Conn.  Hartford  1826,  p.  2.5. 

It  is  always  right  to  attack  a  doctrine  in  the  words  of  those  who 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  277 

profess  it.     Every  cardinal  doctrine  of  the  papacy  can  be  traced  to  a 
certain  period,  when  it  became  an  element  of  the  system. 

Monachism  began  to  be  taught  by  St.  Anthony  in  the  4th  century. 

Auricular  confession  in  the  5th;  but  was  finally  established  by  In- 
nocent Hi.  early  in  the  13th  century. 

Theoretical  purgatory  began  to  be  spoken  of  from  the  Pagans  and 
Jews  in  the  Gth  century;  but  did  not  obtain  a  fixed  residence  till  in 
the  council  of  Florence,  it  became  an  integral  part  of  infallibility 
A.  D. 1430. 

Early  in  the  7th  century  the  idea  of  univei^sal  father,  or  pope  ol)« 
tained. 

In  the  8lh  century,  after  many  and  various  fortunes,  images  began 
to  be  set  up  ;  and  in  the  i)th  became  an  integral  part  of  Roman  Catho- 
.isism. 

In  the  year  730,  a  council  summoned  by  Leo.  III.  with  only  one 
dissentii>g  vote,  called  the  worship  of  images  and  relics  idolatry. 

Celibacy  among  the  clergy  began  to  be  canonical  in  the  11th  cen- 
tury. 

In  the  9th  century,  the  doctrine  of  tiansubstantiation  began  to  be 
talked  of  commonly ;  but  was  made  infallible  by  pope  Innocent  III. 
4th  Lateran  council. 

Scotus,  of  Roman  Catholic  memory,  affirmed  that  it  was  not  an 
article  of  faith  before  the  Lateran  council  of  1215,  and  that  it  cannot 
be  proved  from  scripture.  Bellarmine,  Book  iii.  chap.  23,  on  the  Eu- 
charist, quotes  Scotus  as  saying  so,  and  admits,  "  though  the  scrip- 
tures quoted  last  abbve,  seems  clear  to  us,  and  ought  to  convince  any 
man  that  is  not  forward ;  yet,  it  may  justly  be  doubted,  whether  it  be 
so,  (proved  by  scripture,)  when  the  most  learned  and  acute  men,  such 
as  8cotus,  in  particular,  held  a  contrary  opinion."  Cardinal  Cajetan, 
Ochan,  and  bishop  Fisher,  cum  multis  aliis,  held  the  same  opinion. 

Among  Protestants,  the  reason  and  authority  of  religious  belief  and 
practice,  is,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord."  It  is  not  important  to  ascertain 
when  any  opinion  or  practice  beg«B,  nor  who  introduced  it ;  but  if  it 
be  not  in  the  bible,  no  matter  how  ancient  it  may  be.  It  wants  apostolic 
sanction,  for  the  apostles  sanction  only  what  was  written  and  ordained 
before  their  death.  St.  Clement,  and  St.  Ignatius,  and  St.  Irenaeus, 
and  all  the  other  saints  in  the  Roman  calendar,  were  born  too  late  to 
sanction  any  article  of  faith,  or  morals,  by  their  vote. 

But  a  few  words  on  transubstautiation.  "  A  sacrament"  says  the 
church,  "  is  an  outward  and  visible  sign  of  some  inward  and  spiritual  • 
grace."  Now,  it  cannot  be  both  the  sign  and  the  thing  signified.  If, 
then,  the  Eucharist  be  a  sacrament,  it  cannot  be  true  that  it  is  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  transubstantiated.  Rome  ought,  then,  to 
strike  it  from  her  list  of  sacraments. 

But  Jesus  gave  the  eucharist  for  a  sign,  a  keepsake,  a  memorial  of 
his  love.  It  is,  then,  a  commemorative  institution,  as  well  as  a  sign 
of  New  Testament  blessings :  "  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me." 
Like  other  tokens  of  love,  it  has  inscribed  upon  it  the  name  of  the 
donor.  As  was  said  of  the  passover ;  it  is  the  Lord's  passover :  so  says 
Jesus,  "  this  is  my  body." 

Now,  as  all  words  have  a  literal  and  figurative  meaning,  the  only 
question  here  is.  Are  these  words  to  be  taken  literally  or  figuratively  ? 
If  literally,  some  good  reason  must  be  offered:  and  what  is  it?  Be- 
cause some  fither,  pope,  or  council  so  decided  1     We  must  have  the 


2'i'8  DEBATE    OX   THE 

reason  which  authorised  them,  else  their  decision  is  a  mere  assump* 
lion. 

Where  shall  that  reason  be  found  T  Is  it  because  Jesus  always  so 
speaks,  that  he  must  be  thus  understood  1  Then  I  contend,  that  when 
he  said,  "  /  am  ike  door"  he  was  literally  transubstantiated  into  a 
door ;  and  when  he  said,  "  /  am  the  bread  which  came  down  from 
heaven,"  he  was  converted  into  bread;  ani'  when  he  said,  ^^  I  am  the 
true  vine,"  he  was  literally  changed  into  arealo/ne.  And  why  not  1 
Is  it  more  irrational,  marvelous,  incredible,  than  that  "this  loaf  is 
my  body,"  should  mean  that  this  loaf  was  converted  into  his  body, 
and  changed  into  flesh;  and  that  while  the  apostles  were  eafing  the 
loaf,  they  were  eating  the  living  flesh  of  him  that  stood  before  them  ?  ! 
If,  then,  the  bishop  assumes  a  literal  interpretation  in  the  one  case ;  I 
assume  it  in  these  and  various  other  passages.  For,  if  he  may  assume 
ad  libitum,  so  may  I ;  and  so  may  every  one  else ;  and  then  what 
comes  of  the  certainty  of  language  1  It  is,  then,  without  law,  precedent, 
or  authority,  to  assume  the  very  point  in  debate  ;  and  to  say,  that  be- 
cause it  reads  this  is  my  body,  it  means  that  bread  is  converted  into  flesh. 

This  style,  of  the  passage  in  dispute,  is  very  common  in  both  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments.  So  early  as  the  time  of  Joseph,  we  read 
"  the  seven  good  kine  are  seven  years," — and  "  the  seven  good  ears  are 
seven  years."  What  a -transubstantiation  !  But  change  are  into  re- 
present, which  is  its  meaning,  in  a  thousand  places,  and  all  is  plain. 

Again  :  says  Jesus,  "  Destroy  this  temple,"  pointing  to  his  body. 
"  The  field  is  the  world — the  reapers  are  the  angels." — Are  these, 
also,  transubstantiations  ?  Paul  also  speaks  thus,  when  he  says  of  the 
rock  Horeb,  "  that  rock  tuas  Christ."  And  John  the  apostle,  "  the 
seven  stars  are  seven  angels ;"  "  the  seven  candlesticks  are  seven 
churches."  And  what  is  the  difference  between  these  phrases,  and 
"  this  is  my  body  V — but  finally  on  this  part  of  the  subject,  Jesus 
said  of  the  cup,  "  this  cup  is  the  New  Testament."  Does  not  that, 
on  the  bishop's  premises,  prove  that  the  cup  was  changed  into  the 
New  Testament  1  !  But,  if  by  pranouncing  over  a  loaf  the  words  of 
consecration  a  priest  has  power  to  change  bread  into  flesh,  and  wine 
into  blood,  he  has,  indeed,  a  power  truly  miraculous  and  divine ;  and 
works  as  many  miracles  in  the  whole  course  of  his  life  as  he  says 
masses.  A  claim  to  such  a  divine,  supernatural,  .and  extraordinary 
power,  ought  not  to  be  claimed  upon  an  arbitrary,  capricious,  and 
whimsical  interpretation  of  a  word  !  Good  reasons  ought  to  be  offered 
by  any  man,  who  passes  himself  on  the  community,  as  possessing 
power  equal  to  quickening  the  dead  and  suspending  the  laws  of  nature. 

Once  more,  for  the  present :  If,  you  believe  the  priest  and  receive 
the  bread  as  flesh,  you  never  after  can  with  reason  believe  your  own 
senses :  for,  when  your  eye  declares  it  bread,  and  your  senses  of 
smelling,  tasting,  feeling,  and  I  might  add,  your  hearing — all  declare 
that  it  is  still  bread  and  not  flesh — If,  I  say,  you  can,  contrary  to  your 
own  senses,  which  God  has  given  you  as  the  means  of  knowledge 
and  certainty,  thus  implicitly  believe  the  declaration  of  a  priest;  you 
are  disqualified  for  reasoning,  for  believing  the  christian  religion,  or 
your  own  senses  on  any  subject  of  which  they  are  witnesses.  So 
that  it  may  be  truly  said,  he  that  believes  in  transubstantiation,  can 
rationally  believe  in  nothing  else.  All  the  christian  miracles,  were 
to  be  believed — not  because  they  were  contrary  to  the  evidence  of 
sense ;  but  because  they  were  in  accordance  with  that  eviaence.     v 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  279 

I  cannot  argue  this  point  with  any  sort  of  ability,  I  cannot  feel  in 
earnest.  I  seem  to  myself  as  if  I  were  reasoning  against  a  thing 
which  no  person  believed ;  and  I  never  could  with  any  sort  of  spirit, 
discuss  a  matter,  unless  there  was  some  little  show  of  plausibility, 
or  shadow  of  reason  in  it.  The  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  is  sc 
absurd,  that  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever  read  a  tract  through  against  it  in 
my  life.  But  this  subject  gives  such  glory  to  the  priests  and  has 
wrought  such  miracles  upon  the  superstitious  crowd,  that  it  is  worth 
more  to  sustain  the  priesthood,  than  all  the  other  six  Roman  sacra- 
ments. And  that  which  causes  this  most  incredible  of  all  things,  to 
be  devoured  by  such  multitudes  is,  that  it  expiates  sin.  Hence  the 
body  of  Christ  is  daily  eaten  by  hundreds  of  thousands,  as  a  sin  of- 
fering together  with  "  his  soul  and  divinity,"  as  decided  by  the  coun- 
cil of  Trent !  The  Messiah  is  then  always  suffering,  always  bleed- 
ing, always  dying,  always  expiating  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself; 
and  his  people  are  always  literally  devouring  his  flesh  !  What  a  pic- 
ture !!     1  shall  turn  away  from  it ;  for  my  soul  sickens  at  the  thought. 

Protestants  know  that  the  sin  of  forgetfulness  is  the  easily  beset- 
ting sin  of  mortals ;  and  that  they  need  commemorative  institutions. 
Hence,  they  highly  appreciate  the  honor  of  having  a  Lord's  table,  a 
Lord's  supper,  a  holy  communion  and  fellowship,  through  these  sa- 
cred emblems  of  a  Savior's  love.  "  The  loaf,  which  we  break,"  says 
the  apostle,  "is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ?  The 
cup  over  which  we  give  thanks,  is  it  not  the  communion,  or  the  joint 
participation  of  his  blood  ]" — Hence,  the  New  Testament  with  its 
spiritual  and  heavenly  blessings  is  always  contemplated,  realized,  and 
remembered  with  holy  thankfulness  in  the  christian  assemblies,  while 
they  partake  of  the  sacred  emblems  of  that  great  sacrifice  "  once  of- 
fered for  the  sins  of  many.  For  by  one  offering  up  of  himself,  he  has 
forever  perfected  them  who  are  sanctified." 

Having  yet  remaining  a  few  minutes,  I  shall  prepare  the  way  for 
the  introduction  of  my  seventh  proposition.  Having  touched  at  the 
roots  of  all  the  principal  corruptions,  and  having  yet  heard  nothing  in 
reply,  I  will  anticipate  that  proposition  with  a  few  remarks  on  the  pa- 
pistical notion  of  a  judge  of  controversy. 

The  council  of  Trent  decreed  "  that  the  oral  traditions  of  the  Cath- 
olic church,"  (meaning  the  Roman)  "are  to  be  received, ^aW  pietatia 
affectu  ac  reverentia  siiscipit  ac  veneratur, — with  equal  piety  and  rever- 
ence as  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament." — Council  of  Trent 
4th  session. 

Then  she  asserts  :  "  It  belongs  to  the  church  to  judge  of  the  true 
sense  and  interpretation  of  scripture ;  and  that  no  person  shall  dare 
to  interpret  it  in  matters  relating  to  faith  and  manners  to  any  sense 
contrary  to  that  which  the  church  has  held,  or  contrary  to  the  unani- 
Bious  consent  of  the  fathers." — lb.  Id. 

And  according  to  the  23rd  article  of  the  creed  of  pope  Pius  IV 
"  I  do  acknowledge  the  Holy  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Roman  church 
to  be  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches ;  and  I  do  promise  and 
swear  true  obedience  to  the  bishop  of  Rome,  the  successor  of  Peter, 
the  prince  of  the  apostles,  and  the  vicar  of  Christ." 

Here  then,  we  have  the  essential  elements  of  mental  slavery  and 
degradation:  for,  if  no  person  dare  to  interpret  the  Scriptures  contra- 
ry to  what  the  church  has  already  held,  or  to  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  Fathers ;  where  is  that  liberty  of  thought  and  speech  and  ac- 


280  DEBATE    ON    THE 

lion,  on  the  most  important  of  all  subjects,  our  moral  and  religious  re- 
lations, without  which,  liberty  is  without  meaning,  and  mental  inde* 
pendence  but  a  name  1 

In  all  monarchies,  save  that  of  Rome  and  Mahomet,  a  judge  is  not 
constitutionally  a  judge  of  his  own  case.  But  the  Roman  judge  of 
controversy  is  the  whole  church,  says  my  learned  opponent,  and  her 
councils  affirm  with  him.  The  whole  church  judging  then  between 
what  parties?  Herself  and  the  heretics  !!  What  a  righteous,  infal- 
lible and  republican  judge,  is  the  supreme  judge  of  controversy  in  the 
Catholic  church  !  The  controversy  is  between  two  parties — the  church, 
ar  the  clergy,  on  one  side ;  and  the  heretics  or  the  reformers  on  the 
other,  as  they  may  happen  to  be  called ;  say  the  church  and  the  here- 
tics. And  who  is  umpire,  who  is  supreme  judge  of  both  f  One  of 
the  parties,  indeed,  the  church  herself!  This  is  the  archetype — the 
beau  ideal,  of  civil  liberty,  and  republican  government,  in  the  supreme 
Roman  hierarchy.  It  will  not  help  it  to  place  the  ermine  on  the  pope. 
He  is  that  instant  exparte  judge.'  And  besides,  he  is  executive  of 
the  church.  If  the  pope  is  to  be  judge,  and  executive,  and  lawgiver, 
in  the  case  as  he  frequently  is,  what  a  splendid  picture  of  a  republi- 
can president  or  judge  have  we  got  in  the  Roman  church ! 

This  ghostly  despotism  is  to  be  sustained  and  defended  too,  by  the 
whole  church,  by  vows,  oaths,  and  pledges,  the  most  solemn  and  bind- 
ing that  religion  can  suggest,  or  human  ingenuity  devise.  It  is  true  she 
governs  by  her  bishops.  The  popes  make  bishops,  on  the  recommen- 
dation of  bishops,  and  these  bishops  serve  the  pope  and  govern  the 
people.  Their  oath,  which  is  the  same  in  all  countries,  1  will  now 
read, — so  far  at  least,  as  relates  to  this  matter.  I  have  the  original, 
and  different  translations  of  it,  and  if  it  be  disputed,  I  am  prepared  to 
sustain  it.  To  reconcile  it  to  the  genius  of  our  institutions,  and  to  the 
safety  and  happiness  of  our  country,  will  require  the  explanations  and 
reasonings  of  my  friend. 

"  I,  N.  elect  of  the  church  of  N.  from  henceforward  will  be  faithful  and  obe- 
dient to  St.  Peter  the  Apostle,  and  to  the  holy  Roman  church,  and  to  our  lord, 
the  lord  N.  Pope  N.  and  his  successors,  canonically  coming  in.  I  will  neither 
advise,  consent,  or  do  an)'  thing  that  they  may  lose  life  or  member,  or  that  their 
persons  may  be  seized,  or  hands  any  wise  laid  upon  them,  or  any  injuries  offered 
to  them,  under  anv  pretence  whatsoever.  The  counsel  which  they  shall  intrust 
to  me  withal,  by  themselves,  their  messengers,  or  letters,  I  will  not  knowingly 
reveal  to  any  to  their  prejudice.  I  will  help  them  to  defend  and  keep  the  Ro- 
man papacy,  and  the  royalties  of  St.  Peter,  saving  my  order,  against  all  men.  The 
legate  of  the  apostolic  see,  going  and  coming,  I  will  honorably  treat  and  help 
?n  his  necessities.  The  rights,  honors,  privileges,  and  authority  of  the  holy  Ro- 
man chtirch  of  our  Lord  the  Pope,  and  his  foresaid  successors,  I  will  endeavor 
to  preserve,  defend,  increase,  and  advance.  •!  will  not  be  in  any  counsel,  action, 
or  treaty,  in  which  shall  be  plotted  against  our  said  lord,  and  the  said  Roman 
church,  any  thin^  to  the  hurt  or  prejudice  of  their  persons,  right,  honor,  state 
or  power;  and  if  I  shall  know  any  such  thing  to  be  treated  or  agitated  by  any 
whatsoever,  I  will  signify  it  to  our  said  lord,  or  to  some  other  by  whom  it  may 
come  to  his  knowledge.  The  rules  of  the  holy  Fathers,  the  apostolic  decrees, 
ordinances,  or  disposals,  reservations,  provisions,  and  mandates,  I  will  observe 
with  all  my  might,  and  cause  to  be  observed  by  others.  Heretics,  schismatics, 
and  rebels  to  our  said  lord,  or  his  foresaid  successors,  I  will  to  my  utmost  power 
persecute  and  oppose." 

The  Latin  of  the  last  sentence  of  which  reads  : 

"  Hereticos,  schismaticos,  et  rebelles,  eidem  domino  nostro  vel  successoribus 
prredictis  pro  posse  persequar  et  irapugnabo." — [Pontiticale  Roman.  Edit.  Ant- 
werp. A.  D.  1626. 

Here  then  is  the  most  solemn  pledge  and  vow  given  by  evert/  hiahop 


K05IAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  281 

tf  Rome,  that  he  will  to  the  utmost  of  his  power  persecute  and  destroy 
heretics  and  schismatics  !  Does  not  this  indisputable  fact,  alone,  sus- 
tain my  seventh  proposition,  and  prove  that  the  genius  of  the  Latin 
church  is  anti- American  and  essentially  opposed  to  the  existence  of  all 
free  institutions  1     [Time  expired.] 

Half  past  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

You  perceive,  my  friends,  that  there  is  scarcely  a  single  tenet  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  faith,  which  my  friend  has  not  brought  into  view 
this  morning.  How  then  am  I  to  escape  the  charge  of  desultoriness, 
in  following  such  an  argument?  The  whole  category,  from  Alpha  to 
Omega,  shoots  up  before  me,  shifting  with  the  rapidity  of  lightning. 
It  is  the  necessary  effect  of  the  confusion  of  my  learned  friend's  ideas, 
and  of  the  order  in  which  he  arranged  the  propositions  whose  discus- 
sion was  to  call  them  forth.  The  very  first  of  these  propositions — the 
first  word  of  it — Holy — would  have  called  up  for  discussion  all  we 
have  heard  on  the  immorality  of  the  church.  As  my  friend  thought 
fit  to  commence  as  he  has  done,  order  and  method  continue  to  be  ex- 
iled from  this  debate.  He  selected  the  poinis  of  attack  and  the  plan  of 
campaign ;  let  him  not  charge  on  me  his  own  blunders,  which  he  sees 
now,  too  late.  There  was  one  great  question  which  he  should  have 
determined,  a  limine ,-  it  would  have  cut  off  all  this  desultory  argu- 
mentation. It  is  this.  Did  Jesus  Christ  establish  an  infallible  tribu- 
nal to  determine  the  meaning  of  scripture?  If  so,  we  are  bound  by  its 
decisions.  If  not,  the  whole  Catholic  religion  falls  to  the  ground. 
Now,  my  friends,  I  endeavored  to  prove  that  Christ  did  establish  such 
a  tribunal,  and  I  defy  any  one  to  bring  from  the  Bible  proof  to  the 
contrary.  One  text  alone  is  sufficient  to  put  this  matter  at  rest  for 
ever.  "  The  church  is  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth."  I  began 
to  enforce  my  argument,  when  my  time  expired,  and  my  friend  seemed 
unwilling  to  let  slip  the  opportunity,  but  got  up  immediately,  and  said 
that  my  last  observations  of  yesterday  were  unworthy  of  notice. 

He  brought  as  a  parallel  to  the  words,  "  I  am  with  you  all  days  even 
to  the  end  of  the  world,"  the  customary  ancient  salutation,  "  the  Lord  be 
with  you  ;"  and  argued  from  this,  that  Christ's  words  mean  no  more  than 
that!  But,  my  friends,  what  point  of  comparison  is  there  between  the 
words,  "  God  be  with  you,"  which  one  frail  man  addresses  to  another, 
and  the  words,  the  solemn  promises  of  the  Savior,  commissioning  his 
apostles  to  preach  his  gospel,  and  cheering  their  despondency  by  the 
divine  assurance,  "  Behold,  I  am  with  you  all  days  even  to  the  end  of 
the  world  ?"  Are  the  two  cases  the  same  ?  Are  we  not  more  sure 
that  Christ  is  with  his  church  forever,  than  we  are  of  the  effect  of  the 
salutation  of  a  poor  fallible  man?  What  Christ  doej  is  infallible} 
what  he  says  will  come  to  pass.  If  his  church  was  to  fail,  we  shou.d 
have  had  an  assurance  to  that  effect  in  the  Bible.  There  is  none.  If 
his.  church  was  to  fail,  we  should  have  had  miraculous  displays  like 
that  of  Sinai,  and  of  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  at  Pentecost,  mark- 
ing the  commencement  of  a  new  era.  Or  Christ  would  have  come 
again  upon  earth,  rebuked  and  banished  error,  and  restored  ihe  primi- 
tive lustre  and  beauty  of  truth.  This  has  not  been  done,  nor  has  such 
a  prophecy  been  any  where  made.  As  Christ,  by  one  oblation,  has 
perfected  those  that  were  to  be  sanctified  for  ever ;  so  has  he  by  one 
y2  36 


282  DEBATE    ON   IHE 

revelation,  assured  us  of  divine  truth  in  religion  for  ever.  The  work 
of  God  then,  needed  no  reformation.  If  men's  morals  were  bad,  they 
should  have  been  corrected,  but  religion  should  not  have  been  changed. 
In  a  word,  as  Bishop  Smith  of  Kentucky,  has  so  well  said,  "  Reform- 
ation should  have  taken  place  in  the  church,  not  out  of  it."  Let  my 
friend  twist  the  words  of  Christ  as  he  pleases,  he  can  find  nothing  like 
them  in  human  language.  Christ  was  God  and  his  word  is  what  it 
purports  to  be.  He  is  with  his  church  all  days,  until  the  consumma- 
tion of  ages.  The  heavens  and  the  earth  may  pass  away,  but  his 
word  will  never  pass  away.  The  worse  we  become,  the  more  refrac- 
tory and  insubordinate,  the  farther  from  apostolic  times  and  fervor  and 
purity,  the  more  need  have  we  of  authority  to  control  us.  So  that  the 
power  of  the  church  to  maintain  unity  of  faith,  which  Christ  so  much  de 
sired  for  his  disciples,  is,  at  least,  as  necessary  now  as  it  has  ever  been. 
The  necessity  of  submitting  to  the  church  does  not  destroy  liberty, 
while,  on  the  contrary,  the  sources  of  error  and  contentions,  among 
sects  which  undertake  to  judge  for  themselves,  are  endlessly  multi- 
plied. Christ  foresaw  the  time  when  even  the  apostles  would  dis- 
pute. He  knew  the  itching  of  the  Greeks  for  novelty,  and  their  prone- 
ness  to  disputation — always  learning  and  never  coming  to  the  truth- 
tearing  down  to-day,  and  building  up  to-morrow :  one  wave  of  error 
and  doubt  following  another,  and  washing  away  every  doctrine,  and 
creed,  and  sect,  in  its  turn;  and  he  therefore  said :  "  Hear  the  church." 

My  friend  argued  in  the  commencement  of  this  controversy,  that 
since  there  were  as  good  men  among  Protestants  as  among  Catholics, 
why  should  there  be  any  argument?  Let  him  answer  that  question 
since  he  is  the  challenger.  I  cheerfully  admit  the  fact,  but  what  is 
the  inference  1  Why  that  those  Protestants  were  better  than  their 
principles.  Every  man  who  follows  out  the  Protestant  principles  may 
be  bad.  He  may  find  his  own  code  of  morals  as  well  as  his  doctrinal 
code,  in  the  Bible.  Because  if  he  choose  to  interpret  the  Bible  foi 
himself,  in  morals  as  well  as  in  faith,  he  may  argue  from  it  in  favor  of 
the  lawfulness  of  anything  he  pleases.  And  is  it  not  true  that  certain  vi- 
cious acts  are  done  by  some  men  on  the  pretence  of  their  being  allowed 
by  scripture?  I  could  adduce  hundreds  of  instances  of  the  strong  and 
terrible  delusions  and  crimes,  for  which  their  victims  persuaded  them- 
selves they  found  a  sanction  in  the  Bible.  And  if  the  sincerely  pious, 
the  humane  and  charitable  of  Protestant  communions  ask  them- 
selves the  question:  "are  the  virtues  I  strive  to  practice,  the  fruits  of 
my  religion  1"  they  would  find  that  their  peculiar  tenets  have  no  in- 
fluence on  their  conduct.  Their  piety  and  the  purity  pf  their  morals 
are  the  eflfects  of  naturally  good  dispositions,  of  virtuous  associations, 
of  principles,  which  they  hold  in  common  with  Catholics,  a  reverence 
for  the  divinity  and  a  desire  for  future  happiness,  a  sense  of  honor,  de- 
corum, propriety,  &c. 

In  this  kind  of  virtue  even  pagans  have  been  eminent,  but  their 
▼irtue  is  no  proof  of  the  goodness  of  their  religion.  Aristides  was 
just,  Scipio  chaste,  Regulus  patriotic,  Plato  sober,  Cincinnatus 
unambitious,  Titus,  the  delight  of  the  human  race,  and  Antoninus, 
pious — and  yet  they  were  all  idolaters  !  There  are,  thank  heaven,  con- 
servative principles  in  man's  bosom,  which  correct  in  conduct,  what 
is  wrong  in  principle.  But  if  we  sincerely  desire  to  know  the  fruits 
of  the  reformation,  we  have  only  to  ask  its  authors.  Hear,  then,  what 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  283 

Luther  was  compelled  to  acknowledge  upon  this  subject.  "  We  see,'* 
says  he,' in  his  sermon  the  2nd  Sunday  in  Advent,  "  that  through  the 
malice  of  the  Devil,  men  are  now  more  avaricious,  more  cruel,  more 
disorderly,  more  insolent,  and  much  more  wicked,  than  they  were 
under  popery."  "  If  any  one  wish,  says  Musculus,  to  see  a  multitude 
of  knaves,  disturbers  of  the  public  peace,  &c.  let  him  go  to  a  city,  where 
the  gospel  is  preached  in  its  purity,  (he  means  a  reformed  city)  for 
it  is  clearer  than  the  light  of  day,  that  there  never  were  pagans 
more  vicious  and  disorderly,  than  those  professors  of  the  gospel." 
"  The  thing,"  says  Melancthon,  "  speaks  for  itself  in  this  country 
among  the  reformed  ;  their  whole  time  is  devoted  to  intemperance  and 
drunkenness,  (immanibus  poculis).  So  deeply  are  the  people  sunk 
into  barbarity  and  ignorance,  that  many  of  them  would  imagine  they 
should  die  in  the  night,  if  they  should  chance  to  fast  in  the  day." 
Ad  capt.  vi.  Mat.  Neither  was  the  growth  of  vice  and  ignorance  con- 
fined to  Germany.  They  grewwherever  the  seeds  of  the  reformation 
were  permitted  to  take  root.  "  In  this  nation'''  (England)  says  Stubbs, 
after  he  had  made  the  tour  of  the  island,  "  I  found  a  general  decay  of 
good  works,  or  rather  a  plain  defection,  or  falling  away  from  God." 
(Motives  to  good  works.  An.  1596.)  But  hear  how  the  eloquent 
Erasmus  describes  the  fruits  of  the  reformation.  He  "was  indeed  a 
Catholic,  but  a  Catholic  whom  the  Protestants  allow  to  have  been 
impartial.  He  was  an  eye  and  ear  witness  to  the  introduction  and 
progress  of  the  reformation,  observed  its  workings  with  the  eye  of  a 
philosopher,  and  has  marked  them  down  with  the  accuracy  of  a  can- 
did and  correct  historian.  "  And  who,"  he  says,  "  are  the  gospel 
people  ]  Look  around  you  and  shew  me  any  who  has  become  a  bet- 
ter man.  Show  me  one  who,  once  a  glutton,  is  now  turned  sober,  one 
who,  before  violent,  is  now  meek  ;  one  who,  before  avaricious,  is 
now  generous  ;  one  who,  before  impure,  is  now  chaste ; — I  can  point 
out  multitudes,  who  have  become  far  worse  than  they  were  before.  In 
their  assemblies,  you  never  see  any  of  them  heave  a  sigh  ;  shed  a 
tear ;  or  strike  his  breast,  even  on  the  days  that  are  sacred  to  affliction. 
Their  discourses  are  little  else,  but  calumnies  against  the  priesthood 
They  have  abolished  confession,  and  few  of  them  confess  their  sins 
even  to  God.  They  have  abrogated  fasting;  and  they  wallow  iq 
sensuality.  They  have  become  Epicureans,  for  fear  of  being  Jews 
They  have  cast  off  the  yoke  of  human  institutions ;  and  along  with 
it,  they  have  shaken  off  the  Lord.  So  far  from  being  submissive  to 
bishops,  they  are  disobedient  to  the  civil. magistrates.  What  tumults 
and  seditions  mark  their  conduct!  For  what  trifles  do  they  fly  to 
arms !  St.  Paul  commanded  the  first  christians  to  shun  the  society 
of  tlie  wicked ;  and  behold  !  the  reformers  seek  most  the  society  of 
the  most  corrupted.  These  are  their  delight.  The  gospel  now  flourish- 
es forsooth  !  because  priests  and  monks  take  wives  in  opposition  to . 
human  laws  and  despite  of  their  sacred  vows.  Own  it  is  folly  to  ex- 
change evils  for  evils,  and  madness  to  exchange  small  evils  for  great 
ones."  Ep.  47.  Lib.  31.  John  Wesley  says,  speaking  of  his  own 
time  not  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  ago,  "  J9  dissipated  age  (such 
as  is  the  present  perhaps  beyond  all  that  ever  were,  at  least  that  are 
recorded  in  history)  is  an  age  wherein  God  is  generally  forgotten. 
And  a  dissipated  nation,  (such  as  England  is  at  present,  in  a  superla- 
tive degree)  is  a  nation,  a  vast  majority  of  which  has  not  God  'in  all 
their  thoughts.'    We  therefore  speak  an  unquestionable  truth,  whou 


284  DEBATE    ON    THE 

we  say,  there  is  not  on  the  face  of  the  earth- another  nation  (at  least 
that  we  have  ever  heard  of)  so  perfectly  dissipated  and  ungodly  ;  not 
only  so  totally  without  God  in  the  world,  hut  so  openly  setting  him 
at  defiance.  There  never  was  an  age,  that  we  read  of  in  history,  since 
Julius  Csesar,  since  Noah,  since  Adam,  wherein  dissipation  or  un- 
godliness did  so  generally  prevail,  both  among  high  and  low,  rich  and 
poor."  Neither  would  it  be  well  in  a  Protestant,  in  order  to  apologise 
for  the  disorders,  which  I  have  mentioned,  to  say — "  that  they  were 
only  the  accidental  evils  of  a  moment,  evils  of  a  period  of  change 
and  fermentation."  What !  the  first  fruits  of  a  reformation  disorder! 
—the  first  fruits  of  a  system  of  piety  licentiousness ! — the  first  fruits 
of  the  reestablishment  of  the  law  of  truth,  impiety  !  Surely  such  an 
apology,  and  yet  it  is  often  made,  is  absolutely  weak  !  There  are  multi- 
plied attestations  of  it.  "  Miserable,^''  says  Neal,  speaking  of  the  time 
of  Elizabeth,  and  when  the  fermentations  of  the  revolutionary  vio- 
lence of  the  reformation  had  subsided,  "  miserable  and  heathenish  woi 
the  condition  of  the  country  in  regard  to  reHgion^  That  you  may 
form  some  notion  of  their  condition,  hear  in  what  manner  the  inhabi- 
tants of  London,  in  a  petition  presented  to  the  parliament  during  this 
reign,  express  themselves.  "  In  one  half  our  churches,"  they  say,  "  we 
have  watchmen  that  have  no  eyes ;  and  clouds  that  have  no  water  ; 
and  in  the  other  half,  there  is  scarcely  one  tenth  man  that  takes  con- 
science to  wait  on  his  charge.  Whereby,  the  Lord's  day  is  often  to- 
tally neglected ;  ignorance  increaseth,  and  wickedness  cometh  upon 
us  like  an  armed  man."  "  In  the  county  of  Cornwall,"  Neal  says, 
"there  were  at  this  period  a  hundred  and  forty  clergymen,  not  one  of 
whom  could  preach  a  sermon."  The  situation  of  other  counties  was 
nearly  similar.  Judge  of  the  consequences.  I  have  here  the  authen- 
tic documents,  Luther's  and  Wesley's  works,  to  prove  what  I  have 
cited.  Here  is  the  great  father  of  the  reformation  ;  with  Melancthon 
at  his  side,  both  very  unghostly  looking  personages,  on  their  knees,  be- 
fore an  image  of  the  crucifix  !!  (Holds  up  a  large  and  old  volume,  and 
describes  a  circle,  with  his  person,  exhibiting  the  pictured  title  page,  at 
which  there  was  continued  laughter.)  This  edition  was  published  by 
Lawrence  Schenck  at  Wittemberg,  in  1561.  Here  is  image  worship 
by  Martin  Luther  and  his  co-reformer  !  and  beasts,  and  monsters  all 
around  them.  Mr.  C.  says  that  the  popes  might  have  been  much 
worse  men  than  he  has  described  them.  That  bad  acts  are  soon  for- 
gotten, and  good  ones  more  apt  to  be  chronicled.  This  is,  unfortu- 
nately, not  the  case,  as  history  but  too  well  attests.  The  virtues  are  too 
unobtrusive  to  attract  public  notice,  and  Shakspeare,  who  was  a 
close  observer  of  human  nature,  says  :  If  I  can  quote  him  correctly ; 

"The  evil,  that  men  do,  lives  a^t^^  thiiii  ; 
The  "ood  is  ol't  intcrret!  with  their  bniies." 

I  am  sorry  to  say,  my  friends.  Professor  Biggs  informs  me,  i-nat 
want  of  time  has  prevented  him  from  examining  the  works  of  Liguori, 
in  reference  to  my  opponent's  accusation,  based  upon  this  book.  There 
is  a  gentleman  of  learning  and  integrity,  in  this  city,  who  is  not  a  Ca- 
tholic, Mr.  Alexander  tvinmont,  who  will  devote  some  time  to  it,  and 
who  will  be  here  at  half-past  four,  P.  M.  and  give  us  the  requisite  in- 
formation. I  again  saj',  I  hope  a  large  audience  will  be  present  at  the 
denouement.  My  friend  told  us  he  slurred  over  what  was  worst  in  the 
charges  against  Catholics.  He  has  taken  a  new  mode  of  doing  this. 
He  has,  indeed,  said  the  worst,  and  helps  it  by  a  vague,  but  not  a  slur- 


---  ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  285 

ring  Insinuation,  that  there  is  more.  His  translation  would  make  the 
fallen  priests'  sin  as  bad  as  that  of  the  Corinthian  that  afflicted  by  his 
scandalous  crime  the  fervent  christians  of  antiquity,  instead  of  being 
of  a  different  and  less  heinous  kind.  I  appreciate  his  motives.  The 
charge  is,  as  I  have  already  stated — the  chuich  punishes  severely  for 
the  slightest  fault,  and  excommunicates  the  impenitent  offender,  giving 
him  up  to  the  civil  tribunal,  for  the  punishment,  in  such  cases,  inSicted 
in  some  countries  by  the  law  of  the  land. 

He  says,  we  find  from  the  decrees  of  councils,  that  scandal  has 
existed  in  the  church.  It  is  true;  and  it  is  also  true  that  Christ  pre- 
dicted its  existence.  What  is  the  world  but  the  theatre  of  falsehood 
and  truth  ]  a  field  of  tares  and  wheat? 

As  for  the  other  volume  which  the  gentleman  has  brought  up,  the 
titcreta  Monita  of  the  Jesuits,  1  pronounce  it  an  infamous  forgery.  It 
has  been  proved  a  hundred  times,  that  no  priest  had  any  hand  in  that 
document.  "  The  Monita  Secreta,  or  private  instructions,  a  publica- 
tion sometimes  brought  forward  against  the  Jesuits,"  says  the  learned 
Charles  Butler,  of  Lincoln's  Inn,  "  is  a  most  infamous  work,  and 
wholly  beneath  notice.  Neither  the  original,  nor  any  certified  copy 
of  this  work,  was  ever  produced ;  no  circumstances  respecting  its  dis 
covery,  ever  proved ;  no  collateral  fact,  to  establish  its  authenticity, 
ever  published.  There  does  not  live  the  Jesuit,  or  the  scholar  of  a 
Jesuit,  who,  if  any  one  of  the  doctrines  which  it  inculcates,  or  any 
one  practice  which  it  recommends,  were  proposed  to  him,  would  not 
spurn  it  with  indignation."  Francis  Xavier  was  a  Jesuit ;  our  first 
archbishop,  Carroll,  was  a  Jesuit;  they  were  both  worthy  of  being 
numbered  among  the  best  of  men,  and  it  was  true,  not  forged,  instruc- 
tions that  made  them  so.  The  copy  of  this  notorious  slander,  on  one 
of  the  most  virtuous,  learned,  and  apostolic  societies  that  have  ever 
existed,  the  gentleman  informs  us,  was  brought  to  this  country  from 
France  by  the  secretary  of  La  Fayette  !  and  what  was  the  religion  of 
this  secretary  1  A  Jacobin,  an  infidel,  one  of  the  anti-christian  con- 
spirators, that  would  have  blotted  all  denominations  of  the  followers 
of  Jesus,  as  well  as  the  Catholic,  frim  the  whole  world  1  By  priests^ 
it  it  well  known,  that  such  men  meant  ministers  of  every  creed; 
and  against  all,  but  chiefly  against  those  best  able  by  learning  and 
virtue  to  confound  them,  was  their  hostility  directed. 

A  greater  than  La  Fayette,  as  a  statesman,  I  mean  Thomas  Jeffer- 
son, said  of  the  Presbyterians, — "  Their  ambition  and  tyranny  would 
tolerate  no  rival  if  they  had  power.  The  Presbyterian  clergy  are  the 
loudest,  the  most  intolerant,  of  all  sects,  the  most  tyrannical  and  am 
bilious;  ready  at  the  word  of  the  lawgiver,  if  such  a  word  could  now 
he  obtained,  to  put  the  torch  to  the  pile,  and  to  rekindle  in  this  virgin 
hemisphere  the  flames  in  which  their  oracle,  Calvin,  consumed  the 
poor  Servetus,  because  he  could  not  subscribe  the  proposition  of  Cal- 
vin, that  magistrates  have  a  right  to  exterminate  all  heretics  to  the 
Calvinistic  creed.  They  pant  to  re-establish  by  law,  that  Holy  Inqui- 
sition, which  they  can  now  only  infuse  into  public  opinion."  p.  322, 
letter  to  William  Short.  Will  my  friend  take  this  testimony  to  the 
letter  ■?  Jefferson  had  more  opportunities  for  judging  than  La  Fayette, 
and  he  knew  this  country  better.  But,  sir,  I  agree  with  La  Fayette, 
that  all  priests  are  to  be  dreaded  in  this  sense;  that  none  of  them  should 
be  allowed  a  particle  of  political  ascendency  in  this  country.     Our 


28(5  DEBATE    ON    THE 

main  danger  is  from  ambitious  priests  of  various  denominations.  When 
they  confine  themselves  to  their  only  sphere  of  usefulness,  they  are 
the  best  friends  of  mankind ;  when  they  depart  from  it,  the  worst  ty- 
rants of  the  darkest  ages  of  Paganism  were  not  more  intolerant  than 
they.  A  hyena  is  a  lamb,  to  a  minister  of  Christ,  who  casts  off  the 
livery  and  the  peaceful  spirit  of  his  master,  and  turns  round  to  denounce 
and  abuse  his  fellow-men  for  obeying  the  sacred  dictates  of  conscience, 
and  adhering  to  a  religion,  which,  no  matter  how  much  persecuted  and 
calumniated,  they  believe  to  be  divine.  I  could  say  much  more  on  this 
subject,  but  it  is  not  the  most  suitable  time. 

The  charge  has  been  made  against  all  denominations,  but  my  oppo- 
nent has  singled  from  among  them  the  Catholic,  and  made  it  the 
scape-goat,  to  bear  the  sins  of  all  to  oblivion.  I  must  however  re- 
mind the  audience  that  the  Methodist  conference,  held,  not  so  many 
years  ago,  at  Baltimore,  denounced  the  Episcopalians,  for  contempla- 
ting an  alliance  with  England,  to  subvert  the  liberties  of  this  coun- 
try ;  and  alleged  what  they  conceived  to  be  no  mean  proof  of  trea 
sonable  designs  on  the  part  of  the,  then,  obnoxious  Episcopalians. 
This  proscriptive  spirit  is  as  old  as  Christianity.  History  informs 
us  that  the  inoffensive  disciples  of  Jesus  Christ,  even  in  the  golden 
age  of  the  apostles,  were  accused,  convicted,  and  put  to  the  most  hor- 
rible death,  precisely  on  the  charge  of  hating  all  mankind,''''  odio  hu- 
mani  generis  convicti  sunt.  Tacitus  Annal.  lib.  xv.  This  celebra- 
ted historian  terms  the  christians  "  sontes,  reos,  novissima  exempla 
meritos — perflagitia  invisos,"  and  calls  their  religion  itself  "  exitialis 
superstitio."  They  were,  consequently,  dressed  in  the  skins  of  wild 
beasts,  and  thus  caricatured;  the  Pagans  set  their  dogs  upon  thern. 
.Tesus  Christ,  himself,  when  the  .Tews  could  convict  him  of  no  crime, 
was  charged  by  them  with  not  being  a  friend  to  Csesar. — Pilate,  who 
'found  no  fault  ^  in  Christ,  was  willing  to  release  him,  but  the  Jews 
cried  out,  "if  thou  release  this  man,  thou  art  not  Caesar's  friend;" 
that  moment  the  just  one  sank,  oppressed  beneath  the  malice  and  slan- 
der of  his  enemies  !  We,  as  his  disciples,  can  expect  no  better  fate 
than  our  master's.  He  foretold  all  that  now  befalls  us.  "  Blessed 
are  you,"  says  he,  "  when  men  shall  revile  you  and  persecute  you, 
and  speak  all  manner  of  evil  against  you,  untruly,  for  my  sake  :  be  glad 
and  rejoice,  for  your  reward  is  very  great  in  heaven."  St.  Matth. 
V.  11,  12. 

We  have,  the  gentleman  says,  no  authentic  translation  of  the  scrip- 
tures. This  is  not  true.  We  have  a  Latin  translation,  the  vulgate. 
That  is  one  authentic  translation.  W"e  have,  moreover,  an  approved 
translation  in  the  vernacular,  sanctioned  by  all  the  bishops  in  the 
United  States,  and  for  sale  in  every  city  in  the  union.  But  if,  by  an 
authentic  bible,  we  mean  one  perfectly  immaculate,  in  point  of  typo- 
graphical execution  and  mechanical  neatness,  I  ask  the  gentleman, 
can  he  pretend  that  any  Protestant  denomination  has  such  a  one  1 
Yet  my  friend  says,  notwithstanding  the  facts  I  quoted  yesterday 
morning,  respecting  a  new  bible,  that  they  have  a  bible  that  is  suffi- 
cient. If  that  is  the  case,  where  is  the  use  of  a  new  translation  !  He 
speaks  of  Sixtu*'  and  Clement's  bible.  That  only  shews  that  the 
popes  never  taught  that  their  personal  opinions  were  to  be  received, 
as  articles  of  faith,  as  my  friend  would  persuade  us  they  did.  Pri- 
vate authority  should  not  presume  to  alter  the  authorised  version 
This  was  the  amount  of  the  prohibition. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  Z8t 

Now  to  post  the  books  with  my  friend  on  the  subject  of  the  bible, 
1  ask  him  if  he  was  not  infatuated,  for  I  really  cannot  call  it  by  any 
other  name,  when  he  said  he  could  show  us  a  bible  never  soiled  by 
the  thumb  of  a  inonk,  and  took  us  right  into  the  midst  of  twenty  two 
monasteries,  on  mount  Athos,/or  ike  proof?  Home  in  his  Introduction 
to  the  study  of  the  Bible,  vol.  1.  p.  222,  quotes  Oudin  and  Michaelis, 
for  the  opinion  that  it  was  written  by  an  Aecmet — and  written  too,  say 
Burber  and  Wetstein,  for  a  church  or  a  monastery.  Home  says  the  Aec- 
mels  were  a  class  of  monks  in  the  ancient  church,  who  flourished  partic- 
ularly in  the  east  in  the  fifth  century.  They  were  so  called,  because 
they  had  divine  service  performed  without  interruption,  in  their 
churches.  They  divided  themselves  into  three  bodies,  each  of  which 
officiated  in  turn,  and  relieved  the  other  so  that  their  churches  were 
never  silent  either  night  or  day.  This  very  Mss.  Codex  Alexandrinus, 
in  the  British  Museum,  contains  a  list  of  the  Psalms  sung  by  these 
monks ! 

My  friend  says  that  our  getting  the  bible  from  monks,  does  not 
leave  us  beholden  to  them  for  its  spirit.  This  is  a  disingenuous  eva- 
sion. I  did  not  say  that  it  did,  but  this  last  question  belongs  to  quite 
another  category.  My  opponent  says  that  the  bible,  like  the  universe, 
must  testify  to  its  own  divine.origin — it  is  the  work  of  God.  In  this 
he  is  completely  at  issue  with  one  of  the  most  enlightened  Protestants 
of  the  day,  bishop  Smith,  of  Kentucky.  "  These  christians,"  says 
the  bishop,  in  his  review  of  Van  Dyck  on  christian  union,  "  have  done 
well  in  agreeing  upon  those  sound  principles  of  investigation  which 
lead  them  to  substantial,  and  sufficient  agreement,  what  the  canon  of 
scripture  is.  The  principle  is  correct,  and  therefore  all  honest  minds 
rest  satisfied,  in  the  same  results.  Abandon  the  question  of  the  one- 
ness of  the  bible,  to  be  agitated  and  kept  afloat  on  the  perturbed 
ocean  of  expedience,  as  the  question  is,  respecting  the  oneness  of  the 
church,  and  very  soon  we  should  have  amongst  us  almost  as  many 
books  claiming  to  be  bibles,  as  we  have  sects  claimingtobe  churches. 
And  what  are  the  laws  of  evidence,  guided  by  which,  all  christians 
come  to  such  a  desirable  agreement  as  to  the  canon  of  the  scripture  ] 
Do  we  settle  that  grave  point  by  appeals  to  the  scripture  alone  ?  Do 
we  require  a  "  thus  saith  the  Lord,"  for  the  admission  of  any  book 
within  the  compass  of  the  bible  ?"  Ay,  this  is  the  question,  do  we 
take  up  the  bible  from  the  shelf,  and  putting  it  to  our  ear,  ask  it  what 
it-has  to  say  for  itself]  If  we  do,  we  shall  lay  it  aside  without  re- 
ceiving the  desired  answer,  pretty  much  as  the  Indian  chief  did,  when 
the  Spanish  missionary  handed  him  the  good  book. — "  It  says  noth- 
ing," said  the  Indian.  How  then  shall  we  proceed  in  this  investiga- 
tion? "  We  select,"  says  bishop  Smith,  "  some,  period  of  christian 
antiquity  by  universal  consent  anterior  to  great  corruptions,  and  that 
we  may  be  safe,  anterior  to  great  causes  tending  to  cormption ;  the 
year  300  for  example,  prior  to  the  conversion  of  Constantine ;  or  the 
year  250,  when  the  documents  of  the  then  existing  Christianity  were 
abundant ;  or  the  year  200,  when  men  were  living  who  had  conversed 
with  the  disciples  of  John,  and  we  ask,  what  books  were  received  by 
christians,  every  where,  and  with  one  consent,  as  sacred  books;  and 
these,  and  no  others,  we  admit  into  our  canon.  Then  with  the  ut- 
most care  we  look  into  every  previous  writer,  for  concurring  or  lor  op- 
posing evidence.  Finding  every  thinff  nearly  clear  and  satisfactory, 
we  repair  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  tlemselves  lor  acc> 


288  DEBATE    ON    THE 

deptal  and  internal  evidence,  to  endorse  for  and  confirm  the  whole. 
And  here  we  rest  satisfied  that  we  have  grasped  the  truth." 

How  will  the  champion  of  Protestantism  extricate  himself  from 
this  dilemma  ]  Does  he  confess  his  ignorance  of  the  leading  doctrines 
of  eminent  Protestant  divines  ?     They  find  a  unanimous  consent. 

He  talks  of  two  great  lies  !  I  like  strong  language,  but  this  is  sucIj 
as  Milton's  Satan  would  have  better  used,  than  a  professing  christian. 
How  Jews  and  Infidels  will  triumph,  when  assured  by  my  opponent 
that  (Christ's  preaching  and  miracles,  so  signally  failed,  that  the  largest 
body  of  christians  in  the  entire  world,  have  been  based  upon  two  great 
lies,  since  the  year  250,  or  about  that  period !  Take  away  the 
2,000,000  Catholic  and  Greek  christians  that  believe  in  these  two 
great  truths,  and  think  it  blasphemy  to  call  them  lies,  and  what  be- 
comes of  the  few  stragglers  that  remain  in  the  valleys  of  the  Alps, 
or  where  you  please — the  "  rari.  nantes  in  gurgite  vasto?^^  Did  Christ 
expend  all  his  labor,  all  his  blood,  to  give  mankind,  one  kind  of 
idolatry  for  another  1     Credat  Judxus. 

Now,  my  friends,  dispossess  your  minds  of  prejudice ;  forget  your 
religious  education,  if  possible;  take  up  the  Bible,  and  see  if  it  be 
wholly  silent  upon  these  two  great  truths,  not  lies.  For  "2,  or  300,000,000 
who  have  not  all  lost  their  reason,  adhere  to  these  divine  doctrines, 
which  they  find  in  this  blessed  volume.  I  speak  unto  you  as  wise 
and  pious  men.  Judge  you,  yourselves,  and  do  not  let  others  judge  for 
you,  what  I  say.  I  quote  the  Bible  which  you  all  admit,  as  I  have 
hitherto  quoted  Protestant  authority,  which  you  admit  on  all  cases,  to 
be  not  over  friendly  to  Roman  Catholic  doctrines.  I  disdained  to  avail 
myself  of  the  weeds  ivhich  you  threw  over  your  garden  walls,  I  mean  im 
moral  and  degraded  ministers,  as  my  opponent  has  done  with  discarded 

f»riests,  to  cast  your  doctrine  with  them.  With  such,  we  hold  no  fel- 
owship.  The  pure  of  life,  the  men  of  honor  and  of  learning,  whom 
we  receive  from  your  ranks,  we  cherish.  From  the  Bible,  then,  the 
fathers,  the  most  eminent  Protestants,  I  shall  select  my  proofs,  that, 
on  these  two  imputed  lies,  the  Catholic  church,  like  St.  Paul,  so  Christ 
is  her  witness,  speaks  the  truth  in  righteousness. 

To  begin  from  the  Bible.  If  there  is  a  single  tenet  of  christian 
faith,  clearly  established  in'the  Bible,  I  contend  that  it  is  the  real 
presence  of  Jesus  Christ,  in  the  adorable- sacrament  of  the  Eucharist. 
And  if  we  cannot  take  in  the  literal  sense,  the  words  of  Christ, 
"  This  is  my  body ;  This  is  my  blood,"  the  plainest  that  God  or  man 
could  utter,  but  must  adopt,  instead  of  this,  some  one  of  the  two 
thousand  meanings,  invented  by  the  sacramentarians,  and  the  anti- 
sacramentarians,  for  this  text,  we  may  bid  adieu  to  the  doctrine  of  the 
intelligibility  of  scripture.  I  distinguish  two  principal  epochs  in  the 
Gospel  narrative;  the  first,  when  Jesus  Christ  promises  to  give  us  his 
body  and  blood  in  the  Eucharist;  the  second,  whefi  he  gives  them  to 
us.  Before  announcing  his  desire  of  bequeathing  to  the  world  this 
divine  legacy,  as  we  read  in  the  6th  chapter  of  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
he  wrought  a  splendid  miracle,  even  tlie  feeding  of  5000,  with  a  few 
loaves,  in  the  wilderness,  to  prove  himself  the  God  whom  the  heavens 
and  the  earth  obey,  and  thus  conciliate  the  faith  of  the  multitude  in 
the  divinity  of  his  mission,  and  the  truth  of  his  doctrines.  He  speaks 
of  the  absolute  necessity  of  this  faith — of  its  scarcity,  and  expressly 
declares  that  the  sight  of  his  miracles,  or  the  testimony  of  the  sense, 
(>annot  beget  faith.     In  a  word,  thai  no  man  can  come  to  him,  unku 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  289 

hitfrifher  draw  him.  He  then  continues  his  divine  instructions,  by 
•Hading  to  the  miracle  which  he  had  wrought,  in  which  was  a  most 
sirikinw  resemblance  to  the  greater  miracle  which  he  designed  to 
work,  viz.  the  multiplication  of  his  own  body  and  blood,  for  the  daily, 
the  super-substantial  bread,  or  food,  of  men,  with  whom,  as  he  else- 
where assures  us,  in  scripture,  it  is  his  delight  to  dtudl.  He  reminds 
his  hearers  of  all  the  wonders  wrought  in  their  favor,  in  the  old'Lawv, 
shews  them  all  the  wisdom,  the  power,  the  love  of  Heaven,  displayed 
in  thf^ir  behoof,  from  the  commencement  of  their  history ;  how  dear 
Ihey  were  to  God,  and  further  and  better  gifts,  which,  if  want  of  faith  op- 
posed no  obstacle,  so  many  divine  pledges  gave  them  a  right  to  antici- 
pate. The  greatest  of  Kings,  even  Solomon,  in  all  his  glory,  had 
nothing  better  to  give  them  than  gold  and  silver,  a  city,  a  tract  of  land, 
Ni»  earthlj'^  king  can  compete  with  God,  in  conferring  benefits.  This 
the  history  of  the  Jews  sufficiently  attested  ;  and  the  miracle  of  the 
loaves  brought  affectingly  to  their  minds,  what  their  fathers  had  told 
them,  what  they,  themselves,  had  read  in  the  testimony,  of  the  tnanna 
or  miraculous  bread,  which,  for  so  many  years  had  been  showered 
down  from  heaven,  to  feed  their  ancestors  in  the  desert.  They  were 
thus  prepared  for  all  that  God  could  accomplish  to  show  his  excess  of 
rovE.  'i'hey  whom  his  father  called,  who  are  taught  of  God,  hear  with 
faith ;  they  whom  his  nither  called  not,  hear  with  incredulousness, 
while  he  thus  announces  his  own  intended  benefactions. 

'•  This  is  the  bread  which  came  down  from  heaven.  If  any  eat  of 
this  bread,  he  shall  live  forever ;  and  the  bread  that  I  will  give  is  my 
flesh  for  the  life  of  the  world.  The  Jews  therefore  strove  among 
themselves,  saying,  "  how  can  this  man  give  us  his  flesh  to  eat  V 
Then  Jesus  said  to  them,  '  Amen,  amen,  I  say  to  you,  except  you  eat 
the  flesh  of  the  .Son  of  man,  and  drink  his  blood,  you  shall  not  have 
life  in  you.  He  that  eateth  my  flesh,  and  drinketh  my  blood,  hath 
everlasting  life  ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day.  For  my  f^esh 
is  meat  indeed ;  and  my  blood  is  drink  indeed.  He  that  eateth  my 
flesh,  and  drinketh  my  blood,  abideth  in  me,  and  I  in  him.  As  the 
living  Father  sent  me,  and  I  live  by  the  Father,  so  he  that  eateth  me, 
the  same  also  shall  live  by  me.  This  is  the  bread  that  came  down 
from  Heaven.  Not  as  your  fathers  did  eat  manna  and  are  dead  ;  he 
that  eateth  this  bread  shall  live  forever.'  These  things  he  said,  teach- 
ing in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum.  Many,  therefore,  of  his  disci- 
ples, hearing  it,  said,  this  is  a  hard  saying,  and  who  can  hear  it? 
But  Jesus  knowing,  in  himself,  that  his  disciples  murmured  at  this, 
said  to  them,  '  doth  this  scandalize  you?  If  then,  you  shall  see  the 
Son  of  man  ascend  up  where  he  was  before  ?  It  is  the  spirit  that 
quickeneth  ;  the  flesh  profiteth  nothing.  But  there  are  some  of  yo 
that  believe  not.'  For  Jesus  knew  from  the  beginning,  who  they  wer 
that  did  not  believe,  and  who  he  was  that  would  betray  him.  And  he 
eaid,  *  therefore  no  man  can  come  to  me  unless  it  be  given  him  by  my 
Father.'  After  this  many  of  his  disciples  went  back,  and  walked  no 
more  with  him.  Then  Jesus  said  to  the  twelve,  will  you,  also  go 
away?  And  Simon  Peter  answered  him.  Lord,  to  whom  shall  we  go? 
thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life,  and  we  have  believed,  and  know 
that  thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God.  Jesus  answered  them, 
•  have  not  I  chosen  you  twelve,  and  one  of  you  is  a  devil.'  Now  he 
meant  Judas  Iscariot,  the  son  of  Simon,  for  this  same  was  about  to 
betray  him,  whereas  he  was  one  of  the  twelve." 
■^  19 


290  DEBATE    0:\    TIIK 

We  have  here  a  continuous  argument,  and  faith  and  rnfidelitv ,  pi<s» 
tured  to  the  life ;  murmuring  at  impossibilities  then,  as  well  ad  i.ow, 
rebuked  by  the  Savior,  and  acquiescence  in  his  word  and  his  love,  by 
Peter,  as  the  first  believer  of  the  divinity  of  the  Sox  of  God — of  his 
REAL  PRESENCE  in  the  Eucharist.  If  he  spoke  figuratively,  would  h(» 
have  suffered  his  disciples,  who  understood  the  reality^  to  leave  him , 
Ik  who  came  to  save  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel  ?  Woultl 
he  have  suffered  all  his  disciples  to  perish,  rather  than  tell  them  this 
single  fact,  that  they  misunderstood  him  %  If  he  spoke  of  a  figurative 
presence,  the  words,  "  how  can  ynu  believe  when  you  see  the  Sun  iif 
riuin,  ascending  up  to  Heaven,  where  he  vms  before,'^  would  hnve  had  no 
sense.  In  the  Catholic  view  of  the  Eucharist,  it  is  divinely  strong-. 
If  you  cannot  believe,  now,  that  my  flesh  and  blood  are  visible,  pal- 
pable objects  of  every  sense,  that  I  can  give  them  to  you  for  food, 
how  much  less  can  you  believe  it,  when  you  see  the  Son  of  Man  as- 
cending up  to  Heaven,  &c.  The  flesh  surely  profiteth  nothing  to  un- 
derstand this  mystery — it  requires  the  faith  and  the  spirit  of  faith,  to 
impose  silence  on  the  senses,  and  say,  with  St.  Peter,  "■  Lojd,  to  whoirr 
should  we  go — ^Thou  hast  the  words  of  etenial  life."  This  is  the 
bread  which  strengthens  us  to  live  out  successive  ages.  This  is  not 
an  immoral  doctrine.  It  elevates  man  to  know  that  be  is  thus  loved. 
That  be  is  of  a  holy  race,  a  purchased  people,  a  royal  priesthood, 
the  especial  object  of  incessant  wonders.  That  he  beholds  Go<l  with 
him,  Immanuel,^  in  Bethlehem,  hotise  of  breast,  hid  beneath  the  sacra- 
mental veil,  but  destined,  and  prepared  by  this  nourishment,  to  enjoy 
him  hereafter,  without  a  veil,  in  the  rich  effulgence  of  the  beatific 
vision.     [Time  expired.} 

Half  past  1 1  o^clock,  A.  M, 
Mr.  Campbeu.  rfscs — 

My  opponent  in  commencing  observed,  that  almost  the  whole  circle 
of  Catholic  tenets  came  in  review  in  my  last  speech.  If  such  be  ai» 
error,  whose  fault  is  it  1  I  have  no  respondent.  How  many  hours  has 
the  gentleman  spent  in  reading  against  time,  without  any  relevancy 
to  the  questions  at  issue,  or  to  the  proposition  before  us.  And 
when  he  does  reply,  it  is  frequently  to  scovetbing  said  a  day  or  two 
ago. 

I  selected  two  points  yesterday  afternoon  as  comprehending  the 
substance  of  the  error  opposed  in  my  fifth  proposition,  and  even  to  the 
present  moment  be  has  not  presumed  to  meet  me  on  these  vital  mat 
ters  to  discuss  thenu  In  my  last  speech,  I  therefore  not  only  recapitu- 
lated some  important  items  ;  but  argued  one  or  two  specifications,  it> 
proof  of  the  proposition  legally  before  us.  I  also  introduced  in  part  ray 
seventh  proposition,  and  so  far  discussed  its  bearings  as  to  show  the 
anti-American,  and  anti-Republican  theories  of  the  Latin  church. 

The  bishop  has,  indeed,  this  time,  selected  the  doctrine  of  transub- 
stantiation  :  but  has  he  adverted  to  the  various  points  of  argument  I 
have  made  1  Ought  he  not,  at  least,  to  have  glanced  at  Uiese  points, 
in  order  ? 

1.  The  incongruity  of  the  idea  of  a  saccanaent  with  that  of  traBSub- 
stantialion. 

2.  The  unreasonableness  of  preferring  the  literal  to  the  figiirative,  is 
the  interpretation  of  a  phrase  common  in  scripture,  which  in  iw  othet 
case  is  so  interpreted  by  the  party  themselves. 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGIOX-  291 

3.  The  arrogance  of  the  priests  in  assumlnor  the  power  of  woiking 
miracles,  for  the  sake  of  a  forced  interpretation  of  a  phrase  without 
precedent  or  analogy. 

4.  Thebelief  of  such  a  transubstantiation  destroys  the  credibility  of 
all  testimony,  human  and  divine,  and  necessarily  tends  to  atheism. 

5.  That  the  institution  of  the  supper  is  commemorative  and  not  ex- 
piatory, having  nothing  of  the  nature  of  a  sacrifice  for  sin. 

To  which  of  these  important  considerations  jTas  the  gentleman  re- 
plied in  his  last  speech  1  Has  he  formally  and  specifically  met  any 
one  of  them  1 

It  was  also  alleged,  that  the  admission  of  such  a  pretension,  on  the 
part  of  any  priest,  was  debasing  and  paralizing  to  the  human  under- 
standing, and  subjected  to  imposture  and  fraud  those  who  implicitly 
acquiesced  in  it.  There  are  few  persons,  who  so  observantly  trace 
moral  eifects  to  their  causes,  as  to  be  able  duly  to  appreciate  how 
much  influence  in  the  formation  of  human  character  may  philosophi- 
cally be  ascribed  to  such  idle,  absurd,  and  irrational  pretensions. 
We  sometimes  see  with  what  little  power,  reason,  philosophy,  and 
experience  combat  the  belief  in  witches,  ghosts,  apparitions,  and 
other  legendary  tales,  the  effect  of  the  nursery  and  early  impressions. 
When  the  imagination  is  once  filled  with  -such  tales  and  delusions,  ii 
requires  a  power  equal  to  the  dispossession  of  demons  to  rectify  it,  and 
elevate  it  above  such  a  tormenting  infatuation. 

The  gentleman,  indeed,  with  a  show  of  respect  for  scripture,  seem- 
ed to  appeal  to  the  6th  chapter  of  John,  as  though  it  spoke  of  the 
same  thing.  Now,  unless  this  discourse  relates  to  the  last  supper, 
and  was  delivered  with  respect  to  it,  how  idle  to  seek  to  prove  from 
it  what  was  never  said  in,  it!  It  was  a  discourse  upoti  loaves  and 
manna,  delivered  to  the  people  of  Capernaum  in  their  synagogue,  on 
the  occasion  of  our  Lord  having  fed  five  thousand  men  in  the  desert, 
upon  a  few  loaves  and  fishes.  And  as  at  the  well  of  Jacob  he  spoke 
of  the  water  of  life  ,•  so  here,  when  the  miracle  of  loaves  is  the  topic, 
he  speaks  of  the  bread  of  life.-  and  of  eating  that  bread,  as  to  the  wo- 
man of  Samaria,  he  spoke  of  drinking  that  water.  He  goes  on  to 
speak  fi^  iratively  of  coming  to  him,  eating  him,  never  hungering,  never 
thirstino  again,  &c.,  and  in  the  most  figurative  style,  continues  his 
discourse,  till  at  last,  after  he  had  spoken  of  their  eating  his  flesh  and 
drinking  his  blood,  he  told  them  that  the  words  he  spoke  "  were  spini 
and  ///e,"  not  literal  flesh  and  blood — that  flesh  and  blood  could  no» 
profit  the  soul.  And  so  the  apostle  Peter  understood  him  when  he 
said,  "  Lord  thou  hast  the  words  of  eternal  life."  In  metaphori- 
cal language,  it  is  usual  to  say. '  one  hungers  and  thirsts  after  knowl- 
edge, righteousness,'  &c. ;  and  to  say  that  one  eats  what  he  believes 
and  receives  into  his  mind.  Thus  says  David  :  "  I  found  thy  wora, 
and  I  did  eat  it."  The  transubstantiation  of  John  vi.  is  the  very  op- 
posite of  the  transubstantiation  before  us.  It  was  flesh  into  bread,  as  ; 
the  figure  given  in  John  ;  and  bread  into  flesh,  as  the  figure  given  in 
the  Eucharist.  "  I  am  the  living  bread."  "  My  flesh  is  meat,  indeed,'' 
"  My  blood  is  drink,  indeed."    "  The  bread  which  I  give  is  my  flesh.'' 

But  the  gentleman  relies  upon  the  Savior's  leaving  them  in  error, 
suffering  them  to  go  away  in  a  mistake.  If  this  were  true ;  I  can  find 
a  similar  case.  To  the  proud  and  captious,  he  often  deigned  no  reply 
Hence,  when  some  went  away  from  his  discourse,  alleging  that  he 


292  OEBATi:    ON    THE 

was  born  in  Nazareth,  lie  took  no  pains  to  correct  the  error,  thongh 
it  would  seem  that  a  sipg-le  v-ord  would  have  decided  the  case.  He 
knew  what  manner  of  spirit  they  were  of,  and  never  said  once ;  I  was 
not  born  in  Nazareth  ;  but  in  Bethlehem.  But  to  conclude,  the  sub 
ject  of  discussion  in  John  vi.  is  about  receiving  him — coming  to  him 
believing  him  to  be  the  Messiah,  &c.,  and  was  addressed  to  ambitious 
obstinate  Jews.  The  subject  in  Matth.  xxvr.  and  1  Cor.  xi.  is  his 
Savior's  death,  sacrifice  and  the  commemoration  of  it,  addressed  to  hia 
disciples.  It  is,  then,  every  waj'  illogical  to  reason  from  the  one  to 
the  other,  as  parallel  cases. 

But  I  would  ask,  how  is  a  man  to  believe  the  same  sense  at  one 
time,  an«  disbelieve  it  at  another,  when  in  reading  Paul  or  Matthew 
he  sees  the  words,  "  this  is  my  body"  and  when  looking  on  the  table, 
he  sees  not  flesh  but  bread,  why  should  he  believe  what  he  sees  in 
the  former  case,  and  disbelieve  what  he  sees  in  the  latter  case.  That 
he  sees  bread  is  certain  ;  why  not  then  believe  his  eyes  1  Or,  if  he 
rejects  them  here,  why  not  reject  them  there,  on  the  words,  "  This  is 
my  body  1"  and  believe  that  it  reads,  "  this  represents  my  body !" 
Biit  even  after  the  consecration,  and  after  Jesus  had  said,  "  This  is 
my  blood,"  he  clearly  teaches,  that  he  spoke  in  a  figure :  for,  adds 
he,  "  I  will  not  drink  again  of  this  fruit  of  the  vine  with  you,"  &c. 
And  Paul,  after  consecration  says,  "  He  that  eateth  this  bread,  and 
drinketh  this  cup  unworthily" — &c. 

»  Were  it,  however,  converted  into  flesh,  we  would  have  to  ask, 
what  sanctifying  power  in  flesh  ?  or,  what  spiritual  food  would  there 
be  in  the  human  flesh  of  the  Son  of  God  ?  And  were  it  omnipresent, 
how  would  the  eating  of  it  as  a  sin  off'ering,  take  away  sin  from  the 
conscience  1 !  The  virtue  was  in  the  altar,  on  which  the  sacrifice 
was  oflfered :  for  "  it  is  the  altar  that  sanctifies  the  gift."  And  had 
it  not  been  for  the  true  and  proper  divinity  of  the  Son  of  God,  his 
flesh  as  a  sin  offering,  coum  in  no  sense  profit  any  person.  But  the 
priest  can  bring  down  the  divine  Savior  from  heaven,  and  offer  him, 
body,  soul,  and  divinity,  as  oilen  as  he  pleases;  and  have  the  people 
adore  both  him  and  the  miracle  in  his  hand  ! !  He  that  can  believe 
all  this,  is  not  to  be  reasoned  with. 

The  gentleman's  remarks  on.  "  Jam  with  you"  even  after  so  many 
hours'  reflection  since  I  exnounded  them,  have  not  the  slightest  refer- 
ence to  any  thing  I  have  said.  I  could  not  have  thought  it  possible 
for  a  child  to  have  so  misynrterstocd  and  misapplied  them.  I  need 
not  again  repeat  them.  They  are  wholly  misrepresented.  He  has 
"defied  heaven  and  earth."  What  a  daring  logician!  Yes;  he 
"defied  heaven  and  earth,''  on  what?  To  weaken  .as  argument  on 
infallibility  !  It  would  be  hard  indeed,  to  weaken  that,  which  has  no 
strength.  Perhaps  he  mignt  defy  Omnipotence  to  weaken  what  does 
not  exist.  But  the  bishop  is  just  as  fallible  as  your  humble  servant; 
and  his  church  (I  may  with  confidence  say)  is  even  more  fallible 
than  the  Protestant  church :  for,  our  rule  of  faith  is  perfect  and  com- 
plete :  his  rule,  as  I  have  shown,  is  imperfect  and  immoral. 

"  But  Protestants  are  better  than  their  principles  !"  Indeed  !  Their 
principles  are  the  bible  alone.  Their  acknowledged  principles,  cer- 
tainly, are  those  to  which  my  friend  refers  !  A  good  argument !  I 
read  the  other  day  something  like  this — "  Bad  as  human  nature  is, 
there  is  no  man  on  earth  bad  enough  to  make  a  good  papist."  "  Th« 
Bvstem  cannot  be  carried  out  fully  by  any  person."  VVould  my  'leain 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  293 

ed  antagonist  call  this  a  good  argument  against  his  system  1  and  if 
it  not  as  logical  as  that  which  he  has  just  alleged  ? 

The  bishop  accuses  Mr.  Smith  of  ingratitude.  I  have  something 
more  to  do  than  to  del'end  Mr.  Smith  from  such  groundless  imputa- 
tions. Every  one  who  abjures  Catholicism,  is  a  wretch  :  for  Protest- 
ants are  all  heretics  !  The  best  return  Mr.  Smith  or  any  person  can 
make  for  favors  received,  is  to  disabuse  the  minds  of  his  benefactors 
from  error,  if  they  happen  to  entertain  it.  The  best  and  most  grate- 
ful return  that  I  could  make  to  a  Roman  Catholic  benefactor,  for  any 
benefit  conferred,  would  be,  if  possible,  to  convince  and  save  him  from 
the  most  ruinous  and  destructive  heresy  that  time  records,  or  ever 
will  record. 

Next  comes  the  Secreta  Monita  ,•  for  we  must  circumnavigate  another 
circle  in  this  speech  also.  The  Secreta  Manila,  then,  is  just  as  accu- 
rate and  fair  a  view  of  the  spirit,  design,  and  policies,  of  that  order,  as 
can  be  given.  Such  is  our  faith :  and  that  on  no  mean  testimony 
either. 

We  shall  give  some  account  of  the  discovery  of  this  said  book  : 

"We  are  indebted  for  this  "terrible  book"  of  Jesuits' 

•ecrets,  to  the  parliament  of  Paris.  They  passed  the  act  to  abolish  the  Jesuits 
society  :  and  the  execution  came  on  the  Jesuit  college  like  a  thunder  stroke. 
Their  palace  was  surrounded  by  troops,  and  their  papers  and  books,  and  these 
"  Secret  Jnstruclions'^  were  seized  before  they  had  heard  that  the  parliament 
had  taken  up  their  cause!" 

The  reasons  which  the  parliament  of  France,  in  1762,  gave  for  ex- 
tirpating this  order,  which  has  thirty-nine  times  been  proscribed,  speak 
volumes  : 

"The  consequences  of  their  doctrines  destroy  the  law  of  nature:  break  all  the 
bonds  of  civil  society:  authorizing  lying,  theft,  pegury,  the  utmost  unclcanness, 
murder,  and  all  sins!  Their  doctrmes  root  out  all  sentiments  of  humanity :  excite 
rebellion:  root  out  all  religion:  and  substitute  all  sorts  of  superstition,  blasphe- 
my, irreligion,  idolatry." 

Other  reasons  for  the  suppression  of  this  order,  will  be  found  in  the 
following  extract  from  their  oath  : 

— . "  In  the  presence  of  Almighty  God  and  of  all  the  saints,  to 

you,  my  ghostly   father,   I  do  declare  that  his  holiness,  pope ,  is  Christ's 

vicar-general,  and  the  only  head  of  the  universal  church  throughout  the  earth: 
and  that  by  virtue  of  .the  keys  given  him  by  my  Savior,  Jesus  Clirist,  he  hath 
power  to  depose  heretical  kings,  prioces,  states,  commonwealths,  and  govern- 
ments: all  bemg  illegal,  without  his  sacred  confirmation;  and  that  they  may 
safely  be  destroyed.  Therefore  I,  to  the  utmost  of  my  power,  shall  and  will  de- 
fend his  doctrine,  and  his  holiness'  rights  and  customs  against  all  usurpers,"  &c. 

"  I  do  renounce  and  disown  any  allegiance  as  due  to  any  heretical  king 
prince,  state,  named  Protestants,  or  obedience  to  any  of  their  inferior  magistrates, 
or  officers." 

"  I  do  further  promise  and  decide  that  notwithstanding  \  am  dispensed  with, 
to  assume  anj-  religion  heretical  for  the  propagation  of  the  mother  church's  ia 
terest, — to  keep  secret  and  private,  all  her  agent's  counsels,"  &c. 

"  All  which  I,  A.  B.  do  swear  by  the  blessed  Trinity,  and  the  blessed  sacra- 
ment, which  I  am  now  to  receive.  And  I  call  all  the  heavenly  and  glorious 
hosts  above,  to  witness  these  my  real  intentions,  to  keep  this  my  oath.  In  tes- 
timony hereof,  I  take  this  most  blessed  sacrament  of  the  trucharist,  and  set  my 
hand  and  seal." 

Such  is  the  order  of  men  restored  by  ^Saint  Pius  V^II.,  who,  for  re- 
storing them  and  the  inquisition,  ("the  vice  of  the  dark  ages ! !")  has 
been  beatified,  and  enrolled  in  the  Roman  heavens,  as  a  saint  of  th« 
first  order!  Is  it  not  in  striking  and  thrilling  harmony  with  the  ge- 
nius of  our  institutions,  to  have  priests  of  this  order,  all  over  the  land 
z2 


294  DEBATE    ON    THE 

■*    . 

in  charge  of  the  souls  and  consciences  of  American  citizens  1 !  So 
much  for  Jesuitism. 

I  ought  not  to  have  called  errors  "  lies,"  as  the  apostle  John,  and 
the  other  apostles,  have  done.  Why  1  All  errors  are  lies  ;  and  all 
who  propagate  them  are,  by  the  same  apostle,  John,  called  liars.  "All 
liars,"  says  he,  (teachers  of  error,)  shall  have  their  part  in  a  certain 
lake,  Was  it  not  impolite  for  the  apostle,  thus  to  use  such  a  vulgar 
style  1  I  must,  then,  have  fallen  into  bad  company,  when  I  said,  the 
man  of  sin  stands  upon  two  cardinal  lies! 

Next  comes  the  doctrine  of  majorities ;  and  these  are  every  thing 
with  a  Romanist.  They  are  the  root,  and  reason,  and  illustration,  and 
proof  of  infallibility.  The  man  who  seeks  the  truth  by  the  tests  of 
sincerity,  majority,  and  anticjuity,  will  never  find  it  on  earth.  This  is 
amply  true  of  the  present  and  all  past  ages.  There  are  sincere  Turks, 
Jews,  pagans,  infidels.  There  are  very  ancient  errors,  heresies,  and 
sects.  And,  as  for  majorities,  from  Enoch  till  now,  they  have  gener- 
ally, if  not  always,  been  wrong  in  religion.  Where  was  the  majority, 
when  Noah  was  building  his  ark  ?  when  Abraham  forsook  Urr  of  the 
Chaldees?  when  Lot  abandoned  Sodom'?  when  Moses  forsook 
Egypt?  when  Elijah  witnessed  against  Ahab  1  when  Daniel  and  his 
companions  were  captives  in  Babylon  ?  when  Malachi  wrote  1  when 
the  Baptist  preached'?  when  Christ  was  crucified  ?  when  the  apostles, 
and  many  of  the  first  Christians,  were  persecuted  T  ! 

And,  compared  with  paganism,  when  had  Roman  Catholicism  the 
majority  1  Strange,  indeed,  that  infallibility,  after  all  this,  should 
come  to  be  the  attribute  of  majorities  !  But  the  bishop,  in  his  speech 
against  Luther,  delivered  here  in  October  last,  said  there  were  one 
hundred  and  fifty  million  Roman  Catholics.  I  cannot  find  them  on  the 
earth,  unless  I  count  many  millions  of  atheists  and  pagans  along  with 
them.  But,  after  a  more  accurate  search,  I  find  there  are  in  all,  but 
one  hundred  and  ten  millions  of  professed  Roman  Catholics,  and 
amongst  these,  millions  of  sceptics  :  of  Protestants,  there  are  seventy- 
five  millions;  and  of  the  Greek  church,  above  forty  millions;  making 
at  least  one  hundred  and  fifteen  millions  of  Protesters  against  the 
man  of  sin.  If,  then,  there  be  anything  in  majorities,  the  Romanists 
have  it  not.  Infallibility  is  somewhere  else.  The  time  comes,  (and 
'  may  heaven  speed  its  flight !)  when  the  kingdom,  and  the  greatness 
of  the  kingdom,  under  the  whole  heaven,  shall  be  given  to  the  people 
of  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,  when  all  dominions  shall  serve  and 
obey  him.  But  Babylon  will  never  see  that  day  ;  for  she  will  be 
buried  in  her  own  ruins  before  it  comes..  And  when  the  angel,  with  the 
trumpet  of  everlasting  good  news,  shall  sound  the  hour  of  her  judgment 
as  come,  and  announce  the  triumph  of  the  gospel ;  then,  but  not  till  then, 
will  the  majority  be  on  the  side  of  God,  and  Christ,  and  heaven. 

I  am  only  now  at  the  place  where  I  left  off  in  my  former  speech, 
and  my  half  hour  is  almost  expired.  I  cannot  again  condescend  to 
such  a  sacrifice  of  time  to  so  many  points. 

I  was  showing,  when  I  sat  down,  that  the  theory  of  spiritual  des- 
potism always  precedes  the  practical  display  of  it ;  and  that  the  theory 
of  the  terrific  and  appalling  despotism  of  papal  Rome,  is  lo  be  found 
in  principles  and  theories  promulged,  and  believed,  and  taught,  before 
the  reign  of  darkness  and  terror  began. 

The  fact  of  putting  the  bible  under  a  bushel,  of  forbidding  the  read- 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  295 

ing  of  it,  of  swearing  for  ever  to  interpret  it  as  it  has  ber,n  interpreted, 
of  not  permitting  men  to  think  or  speak  for  themselves  on  religion,  of 
teaching  them  the  power  of  the  priests  to  work  miracles,  to  create  a 
god  out  of  bread,  that  the  people  might  adore  it  and  them,  of  making* 
a  supreme  judge  of  controversy  out  of  one  of  the  parties,  or  combining 
the  legislative,  executive,  and  judicial  powers  in  one  person,  (the 
model  of  the  most  cruel  despotism,)  is  the  paragon  of  supreme  tyranny, 
never  surpassed,  never  equaled  on  earth. 

How  any  person  can,  from  such  a  system,  elaborate  a  single  ele- 
ment of  free  government,  or  of  civil  liberty,  I  cannot  imagine.  Indeed, 
the  radical  ideas  of  papal  supremacy,  are  as  antipodal  to  republican 
doctrine  and  American  institutions,  as  are  the  zenith  and  the  nadir ' 
But  my  time  has  fled. 

Twelve  o'clock^  M, 
Bis  hop  Purcell  rises — 

I  have  only  to  stand  here  for  half  a  minute,  and  to  open  the  bible,  to 
reduce  to  dust  the  arguments  which  it  costs  my  opponent  such  a  waste 
of  time  and  labor  to  construct.  Was  not  Civil  and  Ecclesiastical  power 
united  in  the  high  priest,  by  the  Almighty  God,  himself?  Is  not  this  re- 
corded in  Deuteronomy,  and  admitted  by  my  worthy  antagonist  1  What 
says  the  scripture. 

"  II"  you  perceive,  that  there  be  ainoog'  you,  a  hard  and  doubtful  matter  in 
judgment,  between  blood  and  blood,  cause  and  cause,  leprosy  and  leprosy;  and 
thou  see  that  the  words  of  judgment  within  the  gates,  do  vary  ;  arise  and  go  up 
to  the  place  which  the  Lord  thy  God  shall  choose.  And  thou  shalt  come  to  the 
priests  of  the  Levitical  race,  and  to  the  judge  thai  shall  be  at  that  time;  and 
thou  shall  ask  of  them,  and  they  shall  shew  thee  the  truth  of  the  judgment.  And 
thou  shalt  do  whatsoever  they  shall  say,  that  preside  in  the  place,  which  tbp 
Lord  shall  choose,  and  what  they  shall  teach  thee  accord ui"  to  this  law:  and 
thou  shalt  follow  their  sentence,  neither  shalt  thou  decline  to  the  right  hand  nor 
to  the  left  hand.  But  he  that  will  be  proud,  and  refuse  to  obey  the  command- 
ment of  the  priest,  who  niinistereth  at  that  time  to  the  Lor(Njod,and  the  decree 
of  the  judge,  that  man  shall  die,  and  thou  shalt  take  away  the  evil  from  Israel." 
— Deut.  xvii.  8,  et  seq". 

Here  is  civil  power,  and  ecclesiastical  authority  blended  in  one 
tribunal,  of  the  presiding  priest  and  of  the  Levitical  ministry,  and  the 
penalty  of  death  ordained  by  God,  against  him  who  contends  for  private 
judgment  and  refuses  to  obey. 

Now,  my  friends,  if  Mr.  C.  seriously  intends  to  employ  reason  and 
argument,  instead  of  the  calumny  and  abuse  too  often  employed  in  re- 
ligious discussions  heretofore,  why  does  he  rake  up  from  a  pile  of 
rubbish,  sad  memorial  of  the  havoc  made  by  the  enemies  of  the  Je- 
suits, and  exhibit  the  tattered,  and  sordid,  documents  found  there,  for 
proofl  I  expected  "  honor  bright"  from  my  friend,  when  we  began 
this  debate,  and  I  still  expect  it.  Have  I  not  dealt  fairly  myself! 
Have  I  CTone  to  the  sewers  and  streets,  as  he  has  done  to  those  of  Cracow 
and  Paris  for  the  Secrefa  Monita,  for  evidence  against  the  Protestants  ? 
No  !  I  have  quoted  their  most  respectable  authorities — I  have  taken  up 
Southey,  and  Waddington,  and  such  writers.  I  do  not  think  it  honor- 
able to  stoop  down,  and  pick  up  from  the  gutter,  all  the  vile  trash,  that 
Protestants  have  written  against  one  another ;  much  less  that,  which 
the  enemies  of  Protestants  may  have  invented  ;  and  I  do  not  expect 
this  course  from  my  friend,  in  his  attempt  to  fasten  upon  Catholics,  the 
sins  which  they  abhor.  "  Why  did  the  parliament  of  Paris  destroy  the 
Foeiety  of  the  Jesuits  ?"     I  will  tell  the  gentleman.     Because  they 


296  DEBATE    OIV    THE 

had  become  the  disciples  of  the  man,  who  boasted  that  "  he  wa»  tire^  >{ 
hearingr  it  said,  that  twelve  men  had  been  able  to  convert  the  world  ft  ,m 
paganism  to  Christianity,  for  that  he  would  let  it  be  seen  that  one  ruan 
was  able  to  unchristianize  it."  This  was  the  boast  of  Voltaire,  who, 
at  the  head  of  his  letters  to  the  infidel  conspirators  leagued  with  him 
against  revelation,  was  accustomed  to  write  the  words  ;  "£crflBo;is  Tith 
fame,''^  Let  us  crush  the  wretch,  meaning  Jesus  Christ  and  his  holy  re 
ligion.  These  anti-christian  machinations  could  never  succeed,  and 
their  authors  were  too  wide  awake  in  their  hostility  to  the  christian 
faith,  not  to  be  aware  of  the  fact,  as  long  as  religion  commanded  the 
services  of  so  learned  and  exemplary  a  body  of  men  as  the  Jesuits. 
In  £.11  the  entire  world,  in.  China  and  in  France,  in  America  and  in 
Europe,  society,  as  well  as  pure  religion  was  their  debtor.  In  every 
language  they  wrote  the  most  admirable  treatises  on  the  mathematics, 
on  medicine,  on  geography.  Their  historians,  orators,  poets,  mission- 
aries, have  never  been  surpassed.  Mr.  Secretary  Cass  and  Richard 
Peters  of  Philadelphia,  recorder  of  the  vSupreme  Court,  will  inform 
you,  for  they  have  examined  it,  how  perfectly  accurate  is  their  map  of 
Lake  Superior  with  its  1500  miles  of  coast,  which  one  or  two  of  these 
fathers,  while  seeking  the  red  man,  for  Jesus  Christ,  in  their  frail 
canoe,  found  time  to  survey.  In  a  word  the  Jesuits  were  ornaments 
to  human- nature,  but  they  had,  at  the  same  time,  the  misfortune  to  be 
the  ornaments  and  the  pillars  of  Religion.  This  Voltaire  knew.  His 
infidel  colleagues  knew  it.  And  as  they  were  conscious  that  the  lives 
of  the  Jesuits  defied  their  malice,  and  the  learning  of  the  Jesuits  would 
continue  to  confound  their  sophistry,  they  had  no  resource  but  to  op 
press  them  by  calumny.  Hence  they  spared  no  pains  to  render  them  ob 
noxious  to  the  Parliament  of  Paris,  and  reproduced  the  Secreia  Mimita. 
fabricated  by  some  anonymous  calumniator  in  1612.  The  spuriousness 
of  this  paper  has  been  every  where  admitted  by  the  critics.  Let  not  any 
one  who  reads  this  controversy  on  the  theatre  of  its  exposure,  learn 
from  it  that  erudition  and  honor  are  at  so  low  an  ebb  in  the  United 
States,  as  to  admit  as  argument,  an  appeal  to  so  contemptible  a  slander 
As  to  the  oath  of  the  Jesuits,  it  is  taken  from  the  same  book  !  There 
IS  no  Jesuit  that  ever  takes  such  an  oath.  Every  Jesuit  in  the  United 
States,  who  is  not  a  native  of  the  country,  and  intends  to  reside  in 
it,  has  taken  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  our  government.  And  in  George- 
town, in  the  District  of  Columbia,  in  Virginia,  Maryland,  Kentucky, 
are  native  American  Jesuits,  some  of  the  most  whole-souled  and  tho 
rough-going  republicans  in  the  world,  prepared,  at  any  moment,  to  imi 
tate  the  patriotic  example  of  the  first  of  their  order  in  the  United  States, 
Arch-bishop  Carroll,  the  friend  and  associate  of  Washington.  In  this 
pirit  they  are  rivaled  by  the  rest  of  our  clergy.  That  venerable 
Id  priest,  now  before  you,  has  done  for  half  a  century,  and  specially 
in  those  perilous  times  that  tried  men's  souls,  when  a  formidable  ene- 
my was  on  our  frontier,  within  our  borders — nay  in  our  very  capital, 
and  committing  our  noblest  monuments  to  the' flames,  more  for  freedom, 
happiness  and  the  union,  than  any  other  living  man,  perhaps,  of  the 
clerical  profession.  The  Latin  poems,  which  he  published  during  the 
war,  breathing  the  energy  and  spirit  of  the  songs  of  the  Greeks,  when 
they  struck  down  the  tyrants,  were  translated  into  English,  and 
widely  circulated.  General  Harrison,  if  he  were  here  to-day,  would 
inform  you,  as  he  has  informed  me,  by  my  fire-side,  what  loyal  men 


BOMAM    CATHOLIC    RKLItilCJf.  29? 

aiid  true  were  the  Catholic  missionaries  of  Indiana  and  Missouri,  in 
auld  lang  syne.  How  they  exerted  all  their  influence,  and  it  was  not 
inconsiderable,  to  keep  the  Indians  faithful  to  the  cause  of  free  govern- 
ment. My  friends,  if  I  must  have  an  opponent,  let  me  have  an  honorable 
one :  let  me  have  facts  and  proofs,  instead  of  slanders  and  insinuations. 
And,  to  say  all  in  one  word,  in  answer  to  the  charges  against  the 
Jesuits,  Why  did  the  parliament  of  Paris  restore  the  Srder  in  France^ 
Ay,  that  is  the  question.  I  will  tell  the  gentleman.  Because  they 
discovered  their  blunder,  and  the  injustice  they  had  committed  in  sup- 
pressing them,  and  the  prostrate  state  o{  education,  after  the  .Jesuits 
had  been  expelled  the  colleges.  Then,  with  the  magnanimity  of  the 
corporation  of  London,  a  few  years  ago,  who  honorably  chipped  off 
the  inscription  from  the  pillar,  which,  like  a  tall  bully,  raised  its  head 
and  lied,  by  attributing  the  conflagratfon  of  1666  to  the  Roman  Catho- 
lics, did  the  parliament  of  Paris  make  partial  atonement  for  the  wrong 
done  to  the  Jesuits.  These  are  examplies  worthy  of  our  imitation  in  a 
free  and  happy  republic,  where  the  iron  heel  of  religious  bigots  should 
not  be  allowed  to  bend  so  much  as  a  blade  of  grass  ! 

I  continue  my  argument  for  the  real  presence.  I  shall  first  produce 
the  sequel  of  the  scripture  evidence,  and  then  reply  to  the  objections 
of  my  friend.  The  institution  of  the  eucharist  is  related  by  three 
evangelists,  and  by  St.  Paul ;  by  St.  Matthew,  who  wrote  his  gospel, 
in  India,  seven  years  after  the  death  of  Christ;  by  St.  Mark,  who 
wrote  his  gospel  in  Rome,  two  years  later,  under  the  direction  of  St. 
Peter ;  by  St.  Luke,  whose  gospel  was  written  in  the  nineteenth  year 
of  the  Christian  era,  in  Asia;  and  by  St.  Paul,  from  Macedonia,  in 
Greece,  fifty  years  later  than  St.  Matthew,  and  who  had  learned  what 
he  teaches,  not  from  the  other  evangelists,  but  from  the  revelations 
made  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ  in  person  ;  all  writing  at  different 
times,  and  in  different  places,  and  yet  all  using  the  self-same  words, 
the  plainest  in  the  languages  in  which  they  wrote,  or  in  any  other, 
and  the  best  adapted  to  the  poor  and  illiterate,  who  had  the  gospel 
preached  to  them.  All  these  tell  us,  with  one  accord,  in  the  Holy 
Ghost,  that  the  Lord,  the  night  before  he  suffered,  took  bread  into  his 
venerable  and  creating  hands;  and  lifting  up  his  eyes  to  heaven,  (to 
heaven,  to  sho-w  us  whence  that  power  was  derived,  that  goodness 
emanated,)  he  blessed  and  brake,  and  gave  it  to  his  disciples,  to  whom 
ho  had  made  the  promise  of  his  body,  saying :  "  Take,  and  eat.  This 
is  my  body."  In  like  manner,  the  chalice,  saying  :  "  Drink  you  all 
of  this.  This  is  my  blood  of  the  New  Testament."  Now,  these 
words  are  so  intelligible,  and  so  clear,  that  if  ever  the  principle, 
that  every  one  can  interpret  the  bible  for  himself,  should  be  admitted, 
and  enforced,  and  insisted  on,  it  is  surely  here  ;  for  there  is  scarcely 
a  possibility  that  words  so  plain,  and  so*  frequently  repeated  in  their 
plainness,  should  lead  us  into  error.  We  may  even  safely  ask,  in  the 
hypothesis  that  Jesus  Christ  had  really  wished  to  leave  us  his  body 
and  blood  in  the  eucharist,  what  other  words  he  could  have  used,  to 
signify  more  clearly  the  real  presence  in  the  sacrament  1  He  has, 
however,  in  his  incomprehensible  wisdom  and  love,  found  something 
plainer  still ;  for  he  not  only  said,  "  This  is  my  body,"  but,  as  he 
was  then  making  a  law,  a  will,  where  nothing  should  be  left,  in  the 
slightest  manner,  ambiguous,  he  added,  "  This  is  my  body,  which  is 
GIVEN  FOR  YOU,  this  is  my  blood,  which  shall  be  shed  for  you." 

38 


298  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Was  it  a  figurative  body,  that  was  delivered  for  us  1  Was  it  by  figu- 
rative blood,  that  we  were  redeemed  ?  Then  are  we  yet  in  .Jur  sins, 
and  Jesus  Christ  has  deceived  us.  This  it  were,  in  the  last  degree, 
impious  to  suppose ;  and,  therefore,  steadfast  in  the  truth  of  what  the 
Son  of  God  has  done  for  us,  we  may  say,  as  Tertullian  said,  on  a 
different  occasion,  to  the  innovators  of  his  time  :  Under  what  pretence 
do  you  come  ?*nd  why  do  you  remove  the  landmarks.  The  estate  is 
ours :  we  have  the  ancient,  the  prior  possession  of  it :  we  are  the 
heirs  of  Jesus  Christ :  he  made  his  will  in  our  favor ;  and,  eternal 
praise  be  given  to  him,  he  himself,  the  original  proprietor,  has  deliv- 
ered to  us  the  title  deeds  (laying  our  hands  on  the  bible.)  Here  is 
the  pillar,  the  fast  anchor  of  our  faith  in  the  eucharist.  But  it  is  not 
yet  expedient  to  lay  aside  these  texts,  without  conferring  on  them  one 
mark  of  attention  more.  In  the  twenty-second  chapter  of  St.  Luke, 
18th,  19th,  and  20th  verses,  we  read  of  the  institution  of  the  eucharist, 
as  a  sacrament,  and  as  a  sacrifice,  in  a  manner  more  and  more  expli- 
cit. "This,"  says  the  benefactor  of  the  world,  taking  leave  of  it, 
"  this  is  my  boJj ,  which  is  given  for  you ;"  and  in  the  Greek  text  of 
the  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Corinthians,  "  which  is  broken  for  you :' 
"  this  is  the  chalice,  the  New  Testament  in  my  blood,  which  shall  be 
shed  for  you;"  and  in  the  Greek  text,  "  which  is  shed  for  you,  for 
the  remission  of  sins  :  do  this  in  commemoration  of  me."  Here,  then, 
is  every  thing  essential  to  a  true  sacrifice,  clearly  prescribed.  The 
bread  and  wine  are  changed  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  offered,  and  ordered  to  be  offered  to  his  heavenly  Father,  for  the 
remission  of  sins.  Now,  hear  how  St.  Paul,  whose  authority,  upon 
what  I  have  already  remarked  of  the  circumstances  in  which  he  was 
called  to  the  apostleship,  is  entitled  to  special  respect,  speaks  on  this 
subject,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians:  "  Wherefore,"  says  he, 
'  my  dearly  beloved,  I  speak  to  you  as  to  wise  men ;  judge  ye  your- 
selves what  I  say.  The  chalice  of  benediction  which  we  bless, 
is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  blood  of  Christ  ?  And  the  bread  which 
we  break,  is  it  not  the  partaking  of  the  body  of  the  Lord  ?  Behold 
Israel  according  to  the  flesh :  are  not  they  who  eat  of  the  (Pagan) 
sacrifices,  partakers  of  the  altar?  But  the  things  which  the  heathens 
sacrifice,  they  sacrifice  to  devils,  and  not  to  God.  And  I  would  not 
that  you  should  be  made  partakers  with  devils.  You  cannot  drink  of 
the  chalice  of  the  Lord,  and  the  chalice  of  devils  :  you  cannot  be  par- 
takers of  the  table  of  the  Lord,  and  the  table  of  devils."  Who  does 
not  see,  in  a  text  so  plain,  that  St.  Paul  contrasts  the  table  of  Christ 
with  the  altar  of  the  Jews,  and  the  table  of  devils,  which  the  Gentiles 
frequented.  So  that,  in  the  same  manner  as  the  Jews  partook  of  what  was 
offered  on  the  altar,  and  the  Gentiles  of  what  was  placed  on  the  table  af- 
ter having  been  first  sacrificed  to  the  idols,  so  do  the  Christians  par- 
take of  the  table  of  the  Lord,  eating  of  that  flesh  which  had  been  offered 
for  them,  and  with  whose  blood  they  had  been  sprinkled  and  purified. 
But  this  argument  would  be  weak  and  utterly  inconclusive,  if  the 
faithful,  like  the  Jews  and  the  Heathens,  were  not  partakers  of  some- 
thing really  offered  by  them  in  sacrifice.  Again,  St.  Paul,  not  only 
here,  but  also  in  the  Ep.  to  the  Hebrews,  speaks  of  an  altar,  "  of  an 
altar,  whereof  they  have  no  power  to  eat  who  serve  the  Tabernacle." 
Now  it  is  altogether  an  abuse  of  terms,  a  wilful  leading  of  others 
into  error,  to  call  that  an  altar  on  which  sacrifice  is  never  offered  ;  and 
when  St.  Paul  said  we  have  an  altar,  whereof  they  cannot  eat,  who 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGIOW.  299 

remain  attached  to  the  Jewish  relijjion,  h^meant,  no  doubt  what  was 
then  understood  by  every  one,  that  there  was  a  victim  offered  by 
christians  at  that  day,  36  years  after  Christ,  and  eaten  by  priest  and 
people.  This  is  the  victim  of  the  eucharist,  of  which  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke  and  Paul  speak  so  clearly,  and  so  forcibly,  and  which 
we  must  either  now  admit  on  the  evidence  of  scripture,  or  fling  the 
sacred  volume  into  the  flames.  My  opponent  may  talk  of  Christ's 
saying ;  "  I  am  the  vine ;"  "  I  am  the  door ;"  "  destroy  the  temple ;" 
the  ten  lean  kine,  and  the  ten  years  of  famine ;  but,  my  friends,  does 
not  the  scripture  explain  its  meaning,  so  as  to  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the 
sense  of  these,  and  twenty  such  texts  besides.  The  dream  .of  Pharaoh, 
and  his  butler's  were  most  minutely  interpreted  and  perfectly  ex- 
plained." The  evangelist  expressly  informs  us,  Christ  spoke  of  the 
temple  of  his  body ;  lest  this  expression  should  leave  any  doubt  on 
the  mind  of  the  reader  as  to  the  Savior's  meaning.  But  where  is  the 
parity  between  these  passages  and  the  words  of  Christ :  "  this  is  my 
body-^this  is  my  blood."  "  My  flesh  is  meat  indeed — my  blood  is 
drink  indeed."  Our  Lord  does  not  say  of  the  vine,  "this  vine  shall 
be  hung  up  for  you,"  he  does  not  say  of  the  door,  this  door  shall  be 
hung  up  for  you,  he  does  not  say  of  the  temple,  or  of  the  vine,  "  they 
shall  be  offered  for  you ;"  but  he  says  all  this  as  I  shall  shew,  when 
I  come  to  speak  of  the  institution  when  speaking  of  the  divine 
food  which  he  gives  us  in  the  Eucharist.  "  This  is  my  body  which 
is  offered  for  you,  this  is  my  blood,  which  is  shed  for  you" — and  as 
he  was  then  at  the  last  hour  of  his  lifi;,  and  speaking  heart  to  heart 
to  his  friends,  it  was  no  time  for  parables  and  figures.  The  traitor 
was  nigh ;  the  hour  was  at  hand,  when  he  was  to  pass  out  of  this 
world  to  the  Father.  He  knew  how  this  doctrine  would  be  contested, 
that  the  vast  majority  of  christians  would  believe  in  it,  as  they  do  at 
this  day,  according  to  the  obvious  and  literal  meaning  of  the  text,  and 
yet  he  speaks  not  one  word  to  induce  us  to  believe  in  a  figurative  pre- 
sence. Why  ■?  Because  he  meant  it  to  be  understood  literally,  with 
faith  in  his  almighty  power  and  his  infinite  love.  Because  as  God, 
he  operates  his  greatest  wonders,  by  the  simplest  words.  "  Let  there 
be  light  ;^^  '^^  Thi/ son  liveth  ;^^  ^^  Lazarus,  come  forth  ;^^  ^^  I  will,  be 
thou  cleansed.-"  "  Take  up  thy  bed  and  walk;"  ^^  Peace  !  Be  still  " 
•'  This  day  slialt  thou  be  with  me  in  Pdradise ,"  "  This  is  my  body, 
this  is  my  blood."  This  Luther  himself  was  forced  to  admit.  He 
tells  us  how  ver}'  desirous  he  was,  and  how  much  he  labored  to  over- 
throw this  doctrine,  knowing  how  much  he  could,  thereby,  annoy  the 
pope  :  '  but,'  says  he,  '  I  found  myself  caught,  without  any  way  of 
escaping;  for  the  text  of  the  gospel,  was  too  plain  for  me."  Epist. 
ad  Arginteuses,  t.  4.  fol.  502.  Ed.  Wittemberg.  In  another  place,  he 
says,  condemning  those  who  denied  the  corporal  presence ;  "  The 
devil  seems  to  have  mocked  those  to  whom  he  has  suggested  a  heresy 
S3  ridiculous,  and  contrary  to  scripture,  as  that  of  the  Zuinglians  who 
explained  away  the  words  of  the  institution  in  a  figurative  way." 
,  He  elsewhere  compares  these  glosses  with  the  following  translation 
of  the  first  words  of  the  scripture :  In  principio  Deus  creavit  caliim 
ei  terram. — In  the  beginning  the  Cuckoo  ate  the  sparrow  and  his  fea- 
thers. Def.  verb.  Dom.  On  one  occasion  he  calls  those  who  deny 
the  real  and  corporal  presence ;  "  a  damned  sect,  lying  heretics,  bread- 
breakers,  wine-drinkers,  and  soul-destroyers."  In  parv.  catech. 
On  other  occasions  he  says,  "They  are  endevilized,  and  superdevi 


300  DEBATE    Oy    THK 

lized."  Finally  he  devolts  them  to  everlasting  flanies,  and  huilfls 
liis  own  hopes  of  mercy  at  the  tribunal  of  Christ,  on  his  having  with 
all  his  soul  condemned  Carlostad,  Zuinglius,  and  other  believers  in 
the  symbolical  presence.  Bishop  Bramhall  thus  writes  :  "  No  genuine 
son  of  the  church  (of  England)  did  ever  deny  a  true,  real  presence. 
Christ  said — This  is  my  body, — and  what  he  said  we  steadfastly  be- 
lieve. He  said  neither  Con,  nor  Sub,  nor  Trans  :  therefore  we  place 
those  among  the  opinions  of  schools,  not  among  articles  of  faith." 
Ans.  to  Militiare,  p.  74.  Bishop  Cosin  is  not  less  explicit,  in  favor 
of  the  Catholic  doctrine.  He  says,  "  It  is  a  monstrous  error  to  deny 
that  Christy  is  to  be  adored  in  the  Eucharist.  We  confess  the  neces- 
sity of  a  supernatural  and  heavenly  change ;  and  that  the  signs  cari- 
not  become  sacraments,  but  by  the  infinite  power  of  God.  If  any  one 
make  a  bare  figure  of  the  sacrament,  we  ought  not  to  suffer  him  in 
our  churches."  Hist,  de  Transub.  Lastly  the  profound  Hooker  ex- 
presses himself  thus;  I  wish  men  would  give  themselves  more  to  me- 
ditate in  silence,  on  what  we  have  in  the  sacrament,  and  less'  to  dis- 
pute of  the  manner  how ;  since  we  all  agree  that  Christ,  by  the  sacra- 
ment, doth  really  and  truly  perform  in  us  his  promise,  why  do  we 
vainly  trouble  ourselves  with  so  fierce  contentions  whether  by  con- 
substantiation  or  else  by  transubstantiation  ]."  Eccles.  Polit.  B.  v.  67. 

My  opponent  says  that  when  we  meditate  any  doctrine,  we  eat  it. 
So,  then,  when  we  meditate  on  hell  we  eat  it  and  all  its  contents  !  Ho 
says  we  eat  it  spiritually,  but  this  is  nonsense.  I  want  not  the  sto- 
mach or  the  mind,  such  orthodoxy  requires. 

My  friend  observes,  that  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  is  con- 
trary to  the  testimony  of  our  senses.  We  have  nothing  but  our  sen- 
ses to  guide  us.  This  is  the  scepticism  of  Thomas  Tanew  :  "  Unles» 
I  shall  see  in  his  hands  the  print  uf  the  nails,  and  put  my  fiiigen  into 
the  place  of  the  nails,  and  put  my  hand  into  his  side,  I  wilt  iwl  believe." 
The  Savior  condescended  to  give  the  requisite  proof  of  the  senses,  to 
the  doubting  apostle,  but  he  replied  to  the  confession  "My  Lofl  and 
my  God,"  "  Because  thou  hast  seen  me,  Thomas,  thou  hast  believed. 
Blessed  are  they  that  have  not  seen,  and  have  believed."  The 
consequences  of  the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence  are  not  unworthy  of 
God.  Every  pretended  absurdity  is  as  justly  chargeable  on  tne /«- 
carnation  as  on  the  Eucharist.  In  Pope  and  McGuire's  discussion, 
one  of  these  is  to  be  found,  where  my  friend  got  the  foregoing.  It  is 
thaj  of  a  mouse,  that  is  said  to  have  once  run  away  with  the  sacia- 
ment,  while  the  priest  had  his  eyes  shut  saying  his  prayers.  But  is 
this  ridiculous  story  an  argument  I  Then  deny  that  sin  could  be  com- 
mitted, for  sin  is  a  greater  insult  than  this,  to  Jesus  Christ.  Deny 
that  his"  sacred  person  was  outraged  with  blows  and  spittle ;  that  he 
was  dragged  through  the  streets  of  Jerusalem,  with  the  halter  of  ig- 
nominy around  his  neck ;  that  he  was  scourged,  crowned  with  thorns, 
crucified ;  that  his  blood  trickled  to  the  ground  ;  that  his  executioners 
trampled  upon  it;  that  insects  and  quadrupeds  partook  of  it!  all  these 
adorable  scandals  are  the  consequences  of  the  infinite  love  with  which 
Jesus  Christ  loved  us.  The  more  he  is  humbled  for  our  sakes,  the 
dearer  should  he  be  to  us.  But  if  the  scandal  of  his  humiliations 
shake  our  faith,  let  the  wisdom  and  the  power  of  the  Godhead,  dis- 
played in  the  midst  of  these  humiliations,  sustain  and  animate  it. 
Behold  !  the  earth  that  receives  that  falling  blood,  trembles  to  hei 
very  centre ;  the  sun,  unable  to  behold  the  bloody  tragedy,  withdraws 


HOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGIOIV.  301 

his  light,  and  leaves  the  world  in  darkness  and  mourning  and  terroj, 
for  its  author's  dissolution ;  the  rocks  are  rent  asunder;  the  graves 
give  up  their  dead ;  the  pagan  centurion  strikes  his  breast  and  ex- 
claims "  Truly  this  man  was  the  Son  of  God."  Let  us  also  believe 
and  adore  ! — [Time  expired.] 

Three  o'clock,  F.  M. 
Mr.  Cami'uki.i,  rises — 

Knowing,  my  fellow-citizens,  how  much  depends  in  such  a  discus- 
sion, as  that  now  in  progress,  on  having  authentic  documents,  I  deter- 
mined from  the  beginning  to  rely  on  none  which  could,  on  proper  evi- 
dence, or  with  justice  be  repudiated.  I  knew  that  in  all  debates  so  far 
back  as  the  very  era  of  the  Reformation  this  party  have  been  accus- 
tomed to  deny  authorities,  to  dispute  versions,  translations,  &c.  even 
of -their  own  writers  who  were  so  candid  as  to  give  a  tolerably  fair  re- 
presentation of  themselves.  And  as  all  their  historians,  good  and  bad, 
frequently  tell  the  truth,  they  are  all  occasionally  to  be  censured,  when 
that  truth  is  quoted  by  a  Protestant  and  turned  to  its  proper  account. 
I  have  not  then,  to  my  knowledge  or  belief,  introduced  an  unworthy 
author.  And  so  long  as  my  opponent  can  disprove  nothing  which  I 
have  quoted,  either  from  Du  Pin,  or  Ligori,  his  frequent  allusions  to 
them,  with  such  unqualified  censures,  only  shows  how  much  he  feels 
the  truth  of  their  testimony. 

The  Jesuits,  that  standing^rmy  of  the  pope,  are  revived,  and  are 
inundating  our  country.  Other  fraternities  are  but  the  militia:  but 
these  are  the  trained  band  life-guards  of  the  papacy.  Their  oath  is  full 
proof  of  the  spirit  of  the  corps.  My  worthy  opponent  says,  that  they 
are  a  very  learned  body  of  men,  and  that  he  is  not  noiv  a  Jesuit.  So 
much  the  worse.  How  then  can  he  defend  the  order  from  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Secreta  Monita ,-  and  affirm  that  they  do  not  now  take  the 
oath  which  I  read  to  you  ] — He  would  represent  me  as  picking  out  of 
the  streets,  or  out  of  the  ruins  of  some  fallen  edifice  the  oaths  and 
books  of  the  Jesuits.  If  that  were  the  fact,  would  it  disprove  the  con- 
tents of  these  documents'?  It  would  not.  Truth  is  truth,  wherever 
found,  in  the  street  or  in  a  temple — in  a  cellar,  or  in  a  mountain.  But  I 
did  not  so  seek  or  find  them.  They  are  pnblic  and  authentic  documents, 
and  my  opponent  can  only  deny  or  dispute,  but  he  cannot  disprove  them. 

Here  is  another  document,  not  from  the  ashes  of  a  monastery.  I 
do  not  know  the  writer  of  this  article  :  but  it  is  from  an  Encyclopaedia. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Is  it  the  book  of  Fessenden  &  Co.  % 

Mb.  Campbell.  It  is  from  their  press. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Ah  !  I  know  it ! 

Mr.  Campbell  reads: 

'  In  1801  the  society  was  restored  in  Russia  by  the  emperor  Paul;  and  in  1804 
by  kin";  Ferdinand,  in  Sardinia.  In  August,  1814,  a  buH  was  issued  by  pope 
Pius  vll.  restoring  the  order  to  all  their  former  privileges,  and  calling  upon  all 
Catholics  to  afford  them  protection  and  encouragement.  This  act  of  their  re- 
TJval  is  expressed  in  all  tlie  solemnity  of  the  papal  authority;  and  even  affirmed 
to  be  above  the  recall  or  revision  of  any  judge,  with  whatever  power  he  may  be 
clothed;  but  to  every  enlightened  mincfit  cannot  fail  to  appear  as  a  measure  al- 
together incapable  of  justification,  from  any  thing  either  in  the  history  of  Jesuit- 
ism, or  in  the  character  of  the  present  times. 

"  The  essential  principles  of  this  institution  namely,  that  their  order  is  to  be 

maintained    at   the  expense   of  society   at  large,  and  that  the  end  sanctifies  the 

means,    are    utterly    incompatible   with    the  welfare  of  any  community  of  men. 

Their  system  of  lax  and  pliant  morality,  justifying  every  vice,  and  autiioriziug 

2  A 


302  DEBATE    ON   THE 

every  atrocity  has  left  deep  and  lasting  ravages  on  the  face  of  the  moral  world. 
Their  leal  to  extend  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  of  Rome  over  eve  y  civil 
government,  gave  currency  to  tenets  respecting  the  duty  of  opposing  princes 
who  were  hostile  to  the  Catholic  faith,  which  shook  the  basis  of  all  political  al- 
legiance, and  loosened  the  obligations  of  every  human  law.  Their  indefatigable 
industry,  and  countless  artifices  in  resisting  tlie  progress  of  the  reformed  reli- 
^'lon,  perpetuated  the  most  pernicious  errors  of  popery,  and  postponed  the  tri- 
umph of  tolerant  and  christian  principles.  Whence,  then,  it  may  well  be  asked, 
whence  the  recent  restoration?  What  long-latent  proof  has  been  discovered  of 
the  excellence,  or  even  the  expedience,  of  such  an  institution?  The  sentence  of 
their  abolition  was  passed  by  tne  senates  and  nionarchs,  and  statesmen,  and  di- 
vines, of  all  religions,  and  of  almost  every  civilized  country  in  the  world. 

Almost  every  land  has  been  stained  and  torn  by  their  crimes:  and  almost  eve- 
ry land  bears  on  its  public  record  the  most  solemn  protests  against  their  exis- 
tence. The  evils  of  Jesuitism  arise  not  from  the  violation  of  the  principles  of 
the  order;  on  the  contrary,  they  are  the  natural  and  necessary  fruits  of  the  sys- 
tem; tliey  are  confined  to  no  age,  place,  or  person;  thej'  follow  like  the  tail  of 
the  comet,  the  same  disastrous  course  with  the  luminary  itself;  and,  in  conse- 
quence, not  this  or  that  nation,  but  humanity,  is  startled  at  the  re-appearance  of 
this  common  enemy  of  man."    [Encyclopasdia  of  Religious  Knowledge,  p.  685. 

Remember,  ray  friends,  that  one  of  the  cardinal  principles  of  Jesuit- 
ism is,  that  "  the  end  juslifics  the  vieans."  This  maxim  justifies  every 
crime  in  our  criminal  code  !  if  th;  cause  of  the  Roman  church  can  be 
thereby  promoted. 

The  gentleman  asked  "  Why  has  this  orfler  been  so  often  restored, 
if  it  be  not  good  V  I  answer,  For  the  same  reason  that  the  Inquisi- 
tion has  been  restored,  and  by  the  same  persons  too.  Whenever  the 
power  of  the  papacy  and  the  state  of  the  community  would  tolerate  it, 
it  has  been  revived  ;  and  I  presume  so  long  as  the  papacy  lives,  it 
will,  being  infallible,  pursue  the  same  course.  Does  the  restoration 
of  the  Inquisition  prove  it  to  be  good  1 

The  gentleman  would  trace  to  the  hatred  of  Christianity,  the  oppo- 
sition of  Voltaire  and  other  sceptics  in  France,  to  the  order  of  the  Je- 
suits. This  is  a  non  causa.  The  infidels  hated  the  Jesuits,  not  for 
Christ's  sake,  for  no  one  could  hate  them  on  that  account :  but  because 
they  supported  the  political  despotism  of  this  pretended  vicar  of  Rome. 
This  was  the  true  reason  of  that  mortal  hatred  of  the  Jesuits  by  all 
the  republicanism  of  France,  and  throughout  the  world. 

The  bishop  has  confessed  that  he  would  have  the  legislative,  judi- 
cial, and  executive  powers  in  the  same  hands,  and  quotes  Deuterono- 
my xvii.  to  prove  that  it  is  right,  even  now.  What  an  admirer  of 
American  institutions  !  Certainly,  he  has  forgotten  himself:  and  the 
Jewish  institution  too!  It  was  a  theocracy.  God  himself  was  law- 
giver— the  priests  kept  and  expounded  the  law — the  judges  and  kings 
executed  it.  Where,  then,  were  all  these  powers  accumulated  in  one 
and  the  same  dynasty !  It  is  a  mistake  of  the  case,  as  well  as  of  the 
nature  of  the  government.  The  very  elements  of  a  just  and  pure  gov- 
ernment will  be  found  in  separating  these  powers;  the  very  essence 
of  a  despotism  in  uniting  them  in  one  and  the  same  person. 

The  gentleman,  I  am  glad  to  observe,  understands  my  discovery  of 
the  elements  of  all  tyranny  in  the  supreme  judge  of  controversy,  or, 
councils  of  the  Roman  church.  But  he  fails  in  vindicating  it.  The 
council  is  "the  church  representalive  "  consequently,  it  is  the  church 
judging  for  herself  against  the  heretics  or  reformers.  She  is  always 
a  party  in  the  case  of  which  she  is  judge.  Most  controversies  are  on 
points  affecting  the  priesthood.  All  disputes,  more  or  less  affect  the 
standing  or  temporal  interest  of  the  clergy.     Now  the  councils  are 

/ 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  303 

POtiiposed  only  of  clergy.     Is  it  not  then  the  clergy  judging  in  their 
own  case?     And  such  is  the  model  of  a  Roman  Catholic  Republic  ! 

A  word  or  two  more  on  transubstantiation.  Will  the  bishop  please 
inform  us  tcJiether  the  bread  and  wine  are  transubstantiated  into  the 
natural  body  of  Christ,  or  into  his  glorified  body?  !f  into  the  natural 
body,  in  which  he  said  "  this  is  my  body"  "  this  is  my  blood  ,•"  of  w  hat 
profit  to  eat  it  1  and  how  dare  christians  to  eat  it,  according  to  the  de- 
crees of  the  apostles'?  and  if  it  be  his  glorified  body,  how  can  there  be 
flesh  and  blood  in  it  1  for  flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit  the.  kingdom 
of  heaven  ! 

The  allusions  of  my  opponent  to  the  Episcopalians  and  Unitarians 
in  vindication  of  his  gross  interpretations  of  the  eucharistal  words,  is 
unworthy  of  a  serious  reply.  Besides,  their  opinions  are  not  the  sub 
ject  of  controversy  here.  It  is  transubstantiation,  and  not  consubstan- 
tiation,  or  any  other  theory  of  the  presence  of  the  Lord  in  this  ordi- 
nance, which  I  assert,  and  which  he  is  bound  to  defend,  if  he  can. 
The  Episcopalians  would  abhor  the  comments  and  interpretations 
which  the  bishop  dares  append  to  their  words.  He  treats  them  as  he 
treated  Luther ! 

One  of  the  most  unfortunate  references  I  recollect  to  have  heard  in 
debate,  was  that  of  the  bishop  to  the  unbelief  of  Thomas.  The  Sa- 
vior's answer  to  Thomas  fully  expresses  his  sophistry  on  transubstan- 
tiation :  for  Jesus  said,  "  reaeh  hither  thy  finger," — "handle  me'" — 
"  thrust  thy  hand  into  my  side."  So  we  reason  :  "  Take  this  loaf  into 
your  hands,  feel  it,  taste  it,  smell  it,; — Is  it  flesh,  or  is  it  bread  ]  Test 
it  by  your  senses.  Believe  not,  contrary  to  your  senses.  Jesus  made 
his  appeal  to  the  senses.  So  do  we.  Why  has  my  opponent  quoted 
this  passage  1     Is  he  turning  Protestant  T 

I  wish  the  Roman  Catholics  would  hear  Paul  in  this  case.  He  has 
positively  said,  that  it  is  bread  that  is  eaten  in  the  act  of  celebrating 
the  supper.  "  As  often,"  says  he,  "  as  you  eat  this  bread,  and  drink 
this  cup,  you  do  show  forth  the  Lord's  death  till  become."  To  "drink 
a  cup"  is  certainly  a  figure  as  much  as  "  this  is  my  body;"  and  goes 
to  show  that  words  are  not  to  be  taken  literally  in  this  passage.  If 
then,  Jesus  called  it  the  fruit  if  the  vine,  after  consecration,  and  Paul, 
the  bread  and  the  (up,  in  tlie  very  act  of  communicating,  I  ask.  What 
foundation  is  there  for  the  miracle  of  the  mass  1 ! 

My  learned  opponent  tells  you  a  story  about  a  mouse.  It  may,  in- 
deed, have  a  good  argument  in  it;  but  I  do  not  use  such  arguments, 
on  so  grave  a  subject.  He  did  it,  he  said,  to  anticipate  me.  He  did 
not  however  anticipate  me  :  for  I  had  no  intention  of  telling  such  a 
story,  or  any  other  of  the  same  type.  I  think  it  would  be  more  appo- 
site for  him  to  show  how  a  person  can  believe  against  his  five  senses, 
that  a  priest  can,  by  a  few  words  create  the  body,  soul  and  divinity  of 
he  Son  of  God  out  of  a  little  "/>as<e,"  than  to  relate  such  mouse 
stories,  how  true  soever  they  ma\  be.  Surely,  before  they  kneel 
down  and  adore  a  wafer,  they  ought  to  be  fully  assured  that  the  priest 
nas  converted  it  into  a  divinity  ! 

I  must  return  to  my  last  proposition.  This  concerns  him  and  his 
oarty  more,  than  any  other  one  of  the  seven.  We  v.'ill  soon  be  able 
lo  judge,  whether  he  is  determined  to  evade  or  canvass  it.  I  would 
emphatically  tell  him,  the  community  expect  hire  to  discuss  ibis  sub- 
ject above  all  others.     They  are  much  excited  and  interested  on  this 


304     ■  DEBATE    0^-    THE 

point.  Many  who  have  no  antipathy  against  Roman  Cathclic-s  have 
some  fears  of  them  I  belong  to  that  class.  I  have  no  antipathy  :  bu? 
I  have  my  fears.  I  do  honestly  think,  (and  I  avow  it  here,  that  1  may 
give  my  ingenious  opponent  an  opportunity  to  remo-\e  the  impression 
if  he  can.)  I  say,  I  do  sincerely  believe  and  think,  that  Roman  Cath- 
olicism, in  any  country  is  detrimental  to  its  interests  and  prosperity  : 
and  in  a  republic,  directly  and  positively  tending  every  moment  to  its 
subversion.  Such  is  my  conviction.  I  avow,  it,  that  if  possible,  it 
may  be  removed.  I  always  distinguish  between  a  system  and  those 
who  profess  it, — between  agreed,  and  the.  people.  And  therefore  I 
war  against  pmic//?/es  and  not  men.  I  am  not  singular  in  these  senti- 
ments. They  are  possessed  by  a  large  portion  of  the  most  intelligent 
of  this  community.  I  have,  indeed,  been  asked,  perhaps,  a  hundred 
times,  since  October  last,  in  different  places,  and  by  ditferent  persons, 
of  all  religious  parties  and  by  persons  of  no  sect:  "Are  you  not  afraid 
to  meet  the  Catholics  in  debated" — Afraid  of  what? — "Of  your  life 
— of  being  killed,"  was  the  reply.  "  Are  you  not  afraid  that  they  will 
lay  violent  hands  on  you  V  No;  was  my  answer.  I  met  the  infidel 
Owen  and  feared  nothing;  and  certainly  1  have  no  more  to  fear  from 
*'the  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  christians"  than  from  infidels  ! 

It  gives  me  pleasure  to  say,  that  there  are  some  Roman  Catholics, 
to  whom  I  could  trust  my  life  and  my  all  as  confidently,  as  to  any 
Protestant.  To  such  men,  as  Fenelon,  as  Paschal,  as  Rollin,  as  Du 
Pin,  as  St.  Pierre,  as  Thomas  a  Kempis,  I  could  commit  my  life,  as 
freely  and  as  cheerfully  as  to  an)^  Protestants.  In  such  cases  the  man 
rises  above  the  system.  I  state  this  fact  to  interest  my  opponent  in 
discussing  my  sevejtth  proposition;  and  to  assure  him  that  it  will  give 
me  pleasure,  and  I  have  no  doubt  the  whole  community,  to  learn  that 
all  such  fears  are  perfectly  groundless;  and  to  see  that  he  is  able  sa- 
tisfactorily to  remove  them.  Let  the  public  mind  be  disabused:  for 
as  present  advised,  Protestants  generally  think  that  civil-  liberty  and 
the  papacy  are  wholly  incompatible  with  each  other:  and  that  the  in- 
troduction of  large  numbers  of  Roman  Catholics  into  this  community, 
would  inevitably  subvert  this  government ;  and  place  us  under  a  spi- 
ritual and  political  despotism,  intolerant  and  cruel  as  those,  which  the 
see  of  Rome  has  established  in  every  country  on  earth,  where  she  has 
obtained  a  majority. 

Let  the  gentleman,  then,  turn  his  attention  to  this  subject,  and  im- 
prQve  the  opportunity  in  wiping  from  his  escutcheons  those  foul  stains 
that  have  associated  with  the  name  Roman  Catholic  every  thing  that 
is  intolerant,  inhuman  and  tyrannical.  Let  him  show  us  here  in  what 
manner  the  decrees  of  councils,  the  bulls  of  popes,  the  oaths  of  the 
clergy,  and  the  infallibility  of  the  church  are  to  be  disposed  of,  if  w 
could  promise  ourselves  that  the  prevalence  of  his  party  in  this  coun- 
try would  not  be  an  end  of  all  those  free  and  equitable  institutions, 
which  have  made  these  United  States  the  wonder  and  the  admiration 
of  the  world. 

Is  it  of  the  essence  of  this  superstition  to  root  out  and  destroy  every 
antagonist  principle,  tenet,  and  party  ;  or  is  it  merely  accmental,  that 
Rome  can  endure  no  living  rival  1  Has  not  the  Roman  see  even  when 
a  foreign  empire  always  sought  to  he  above  all  gods  or  magistrates : 
and  does  it  not  now  bind  every  bishop  on  earth  under  the  most  hea'i 
searching  and  conscience  binding  oaths  and  anathemas,  to  defend  and 


EOMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGIOiV.  ,  305 

keep  the  Roman  papacy,  and  the  royaUiea  of  St.  Peter,  saving  his  own 
order  against  .all  men  ?  Is  not  my  opponent  thus  sworn  1  Has  he 
not  bound  himself  as  he  shall  answer  to  God  in  the  great  day,  by  the 
most  solemn  imprecations  to  preserve,  defend,  increase  ■anA  advance  the 
authority  of  his  lord  the  pope,  and  his  successors  canonically  coming 
in  ■? — He  has  so  sworn — just  as  certainly,  as  he  has  sworn  "  Xo  persecute 
and  oppose  all  heretics  and  schismatics,"  as  we  read  from  an  oath 
which  he  has  not  yet  had  the  courage  to  deny.  It  is,  indeed,  a  part 
of  the  same  oath. 

It  will  require  the  ingenuity  of  a  Jesuit  to  show  how  these  duties  to 
the  pope  can  consist  with  the  obligations  of  the  oath  of  naturalization, 
or  the  duties  which  a  citizen  of  this  country  owes  to  its  government. 
But  before  I  comment  further  on  the  oath,  we  will  hear  it  to  the  end  : 

"I  will  come  to  a  council  when  I  am  called,  unless  I  be  hindered  by  a  cano- 
nical impediment.  I  will  by  myself  in  person  visit  the  threshold  of  the  apostles 
every  three  years;  and  give  an  account  io  our  Lord  and  his  aforesaid  successors 
of  all  my  pastoral  office,  and  of  all  things  any  wise  belonging  to  the  state  of  my 
church,  to  the  discipline  of  my  clergy  and  people,  and  lastly  to  the  salvation  of 
souls  committed  to  my  trust;  and  will  diligently  execute  the  apostolic  commands. 
And  if  1  be  detained  by  a  lawful  impediment  I  will  perform  all  things  aforesaid 
by  a  certain  messenger  hereto  specfally  empowered,  a  member  of  my  chapter, 
or  some  other  ecclesiastical  dignity,  or  else  having  a  parsonage;  or  in  default 
of  these,  by  a  priest  of  the  diocese;  or  in  default  of  one  of  the  clergy,  [of  the 
diocese]  by  some  other  secular  or  regular  priest  of  approved  integrity  and  re- 
ligion, fully  instructed  in  all  things  above  mentioned.  And  such  impediment 
I  will  make  out  by  lawful  proofs  to  be  transmitted  by  the  aforesaid  messenger  to 
the  cardinal  proponent  of  the  holy  Roman  church  in  the  congregation  of  the 
sacred  council.  The  possessions  belonging  to  my  table,  I  will  neither  sell,  nor 
give  away,  nor  mortgage,  nor  grant  anew  in  fee,  nor  any  wise  alienate,  no,  not 
even  with  the  consent  of  the  chapter  of  my  church,  without  consulting  the  Ro- 
man Pontiff.  And  if  I  shall  make  any  alienation,  I  will  thereby  incur  the  penal- 
ties contained  in  a  certain  constitution  put  forth  about  this  matter.  So  help  me 
God  and  these  holy  Gospels  of  God."  Pontif.  Rom.  Antwerp.  Anno  1626— 
pp.  59,  86.     [Time  expired.] 

Ha/f  past  3  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

Mr.  Campbell  begs  me  to  follow  him.  I  am  following  him  ;  but 
the  truth  is  that  my  learned  friend  runs  away  so  fast  from  his  own 
reason,  that  it  is  not  surprising  if  he  gets  ahead  of  mine.  My  friends, 
I  promise  to  satisfy  you  on  the  vital  question  of  civil  liberty.  He 
will  not  be  able  to  draw  me  off  from  my  argument.  He  is  a  foreign- 
er, an  Irishman,  as  well  as  I,  and  I  am  sorry  to  see,  that  while  he 
breathes,  he  would  infect,  the  atmosphere  of  freedom.  We  are  both 
indebted  to  America  for  the  liberty  which  we  enjoy,  which  he  as  a  dis- 
senter, and  I,  as  a  Cathoiic,  would  not  have  enjoyed  under  the  Pro' 
lestant  Government  of  Great  Britain,  in  our  native  land.  For  myself, 
I  am  ?n  adopted  American  citizen,  having  renounced,  by  oath,  ail  for- 
eign allegiance.  It  is  my  only  desire  to  live  and  act  as  an  American 
freeman  should,  and  escape  the  charge  which  rests  on  foreigners  like 
my  worthy  opponent,  and  those  Scotch  fanatics  in  New  York,  who 
volunteer  to  teach  Americans  how  to  understand  their  own  consti- 
tution. These,  and  their  like,  are  the  men  who  cause  all  the  excite- 
ment about  religion.  They,  and  not  the  Catholics,  are  the  real  mis- 
chief makers.  This,  I  say,  more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger,  and  exclu- 
sively with  the  view  of  doing  justice  to  the  truth.  Let  us  appreciate 
the  blessings  we  here  enjoy,  and  not  withhold,  or  mar  them.  We 
have  not  here  imbibed  the  spirit  of  controversy,  which  may  be  called 
2  A  2  20 


306  ,  DEBATE    ON    THE 

the  spirit  of  the  world,  but  the  spirit  of  charity  vphich  is  the  spirit 
of  God.     The  former  is  predicated  for  another  meridian. 

I  will  now  finish  my  arguments  on  the  real  presence.  St.  Paul, 
speaking  of  the  dispositions  with  which  the  Eucharist  was  to  be  re- 
ceived, seals  the  proof  deduced  from  the  words  of  the  institution  and 
the  promise.  His  words  are  these  :  "  When  you  come  therefore  to- 
gether into  one  place,  it  is  not  now  to  eat  the  Lord's  supper."  The 
apostle  condemns  their  partaking  of  this,  as  of  ordinary  food.  "  What," 
says  he,  "  have  you  not  houses  to  eat  and  to  drink  in  *  or  despise  ye 
the  church  of  God ;  and  put  them  to  shame  that  have  not  ?  What 
shall  I  say  to  you  ?  Do  I  praise  you  "?  In  this  I  praise  you  not.  For 
I  have  received  of  the  Lord,  that  which  also,  I  delivered  unto  you, 
that  the  Lord  Jesus,  the  same  night  in  which  he  was  betrayed,  took 
bread.  And  giving  thanks,  broke,  and  said  :  '  Take  ye  and  eat ;  this 
is  my  body  which  shall  be  delivered  for  you ;  this  do  for  a  commemo- 
ration of  me.'  In  like,  manner,  also,  the  chalice,  after  he  had  supped, 
saying :  '  This  chalice  is  the  New  Testament  in  my  blood  ;  this  do 
ye  as  often  as  you  shall  drink  it,  for  the  commemoration  of  me.'  For 
as  often  as  you  shall  eat  this  bread,  and  drink  the  chalice,  you  shall 
shew  the  death  of  the  Lord,  until  he  come.  Therefore  whosoever 
shall  eat  this  bread,  or  drink  the  chalice  of  the  Lord  unworthily,  shall 
be  guilty  of  the  body,  and  blood  of  the  Lord.  But  let  a  man  prove 
himself,  and  so  let  him  eat  of  that  bread,  and  drink  of  that  chalice. 
For  he  that  eateth  and  drinketh  unworthily,  eateth  and  drinketh  judg- 
ment unto  himself,  not  discerning  the  body  of  the  Lord."  1st.  Ep. 
Cor.  ch.  xi.  Here  the  most  virtuous  and  pious  dispositions  under 
the  dread  penalty,  of  receiving  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord  un- 
worthily, and  thus  incorporating,  and  making  our  condemnation  a 
portion  of  our  flesh  and  blood  and  being,  are  required  of  the  Catholic 
communicant,  and  yet  my  worthy  opponent  quotes  this  sanctifying 
doctrine  among  the  immoralities  of  the  Catholic  church  ! 

But  my  friend  objects  to  transubstantiation.  Then  let  him  differ 
from  Luther  and  the  Episcopalians,  for  the  real  presence,  without 
transubstantiation,  which  they  teach,  is  a  greater  difficulty.  If  the 
bible  be  our  guide,  let  us  adhere  to  it.  W'hat  was  the  first  miracle 
which  our  Savior  wrought  1  Was  it  not  the  changing  of  water  into 
wine  1  transubstantiation  1  My  friend  says  that  he  has  never  read  on 
this  subject,  nor  studied  it.  I  do  not  wonder  that  he  says  it  is  so  ab- 
surd, if  he  never  gave  it  serious  consideration.  (Mr.  Campbell  here  ex- 
plained that  he  had  said  that  he  had  never  read  a  controversial  treatise 
on  the  subject,  but  affirmed  that  he  had  reflected  on  it,  and  studied  it.) 
Not  only  the  first  miracle,  but  every  thing  in  nature  confirms  the  doc- 
trine. The  bread  and  meat  that  my  friend  ate,  a  week  ago.  is.  this 
day,  flesh  and  blood  and  bone  of  his  body.  So  of  trees, — the  juices 
they  draw  from  the  soil,  are  converted  into  branches  and  verdure.  Na- 
ture, in  fact,  is  replete  with  evidences  illustrative  of  the  possibility 
of  transubstantiation.  If  you  wish  for  a  human  testimony,  interro- 
gate christian  antiquity.  St.  Ignatius,  the  disciple  of  the  apostles, 
in  his  Epistle  to  the  church  of  Smyrna,  speaking  of  heretics,  says, 
"They  do  not  admit  of  Eucharists  and  oblations,  because  they  do 
not  believe  the  Eucharist  to  be  the  flesh  of  our  Savior,  Jesus  Christ, 
who  suffered  for  our  sins." 

Origen  says ;  "  Manua  was  formerly  given,  as  a  figure ;  but  now 


ROMAN  CATHOLIC    HELIGION.  307 

the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  Son  of  God  are  specifically  given,  and  are 
real  food." 

St.  Cyril,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  says: 

"  Since  Christ  himself  attirins  thus  of  the  bread,  This  is  my  body;  who  is  so 
daring  as  to  doubt  of  it?  and  since  he  affirms,  this  is  my  blood;  who  will  deny 
that  it  is  his  blood?  At  Canain(jalilee,  he,  by  an  actof  his  will,  turned  water  into 
wine,  which  resembles  blood,  and  is  he  then  not  to  be  credited  when  he  changes 
wine  into  blood?  Therefore,  full  of  certainty,  let  us  receive  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ;  for  under  the  form  of  bread,  is  given  to  thee  his  body,  and  under 
the  form  of  wine,  his  blood." 

St.  Ambrose  thus  argues  with  his  spiritual  children : 

"You  will  say,  why  do  you  tell  nie  that  I  receive  the  body  of  Christ, 
when  I  see  quite  another  thing?  We  have  this  point  therefore  to  prove.  How 
many  examples  do  we  produce  to  show  you,  that  this  is  not  what  nature  made  it; 
but  what  the  benediction  has  consecrated  it;  and  that  the  benediction  is  of  greater 
force  than  nature,  because  by  the  benediction,  nature  itself  is  changed  !  Moses  cast 
his  rod  upon  the  ground,  ancl  it  beranie  a  serpent;  he  caught  holdof  the  serpent's 
tail,  and  it  recovered  the  nature  of  a  rod.  The  rivers  of  Egypt,  4c.  Thou  hast 
read  of  the  creation  of  the  world :  If  Christ,  by  his  word,  was  able  to  make  some- 
thing out  of  nothing,  shall  henot  be  thought  able  to  change  one  thinginto  another." 

My  friend  spoke  of  the  period  at  which  this  doctrine  was  introduced, 
and  quoted  Scotus.  T  venture  my  life,  that  he  does  not  know  who 
Scotus  was,  or  when  he  lived.  I  ask  my  friend  to  tell  me,  who  is  this 
Scotus,  to  whom  he  referred. 

Mr.  Campbell. — I  presume  he  was  a  father  of  the  church. 

Bishop  Purcell. — I  do  not  speak  disrespectfully  of  my  friend,  but 
I  do  not  like  this  index  learning : 

"  Which  turns  no  student  pale. 
Yet  holds  the  eel  of  science  by  the  tail." 
There  were  two  individuals  whom  he  has  confounded.  The  fnst, 
called  Scotus  Evigena,  lived  in  the  ninth  century,  and  wrote  a  treatise 
against  the  real  presence,  which  was  condemned  in  many  councils. 
The  second  flourished  in  the  fourteenth  century,  and  taught  theology 
in  Oxford  and  Paris.  Or,  instead  of  either  of  the  foregoing,  does  the 
gentleman  quote  Soto,  the  theologian,  sent  by  Charles  V.  of  Germany, 
to  the  council  of  Trent?  Of  which  of  them  does  the  gentleman 
speak  ■?     I  pause  for  a  reply.  (Pauses.) 

Mr.  Campbell. — You  may  proceed. 

Bishop  Purcell. — I  will  proceed  to  settle  this  point. 

Mr.  Campbell.     That  is  not  the  question  before  us. 

Bishop  Purcell.  Well,  then,  my  friends,  I  will  take  up  the  sub- 
ject of  indulgences,  against  which  my  friend  had  directed  his  batteries. 
An  indulgence  is  no  license  to  commit  sin.  The  Catholic  church  ana- 
thematizes the  doctrine  that  any  man,  or  set  of  men,  can  grant  a  license 
to  commit  sin.  She  teaches  that  an  indulgence  is  nothing  more  nor 
less  than  a  remission  of  the  temporal  punishment,  which  often  remains 
attached  to  sin,  after  the  eternal  guilt  has  been  forofiven  to  the  sinner, 
on  his  sincere  repentance.  Before  provinor  this  doctrine  both  scriptural 
and  rational,  and  that  the  church  is  guilty  of  encouraging  no  immora- 
lity by  the  power  which  she  exercises  in  the  granting  of  indulgences,  I 
must  shew  that  the  charge  of  immorality  presses  heavily  on  my  oppo- 
nent's doctrine,  and  not  on  mine,  for  he  teaches  that  the  distinction  be- 
tween fjreater  and  lesser  sins  is  not  found  in  scripture.  He  has  advo- 
cated the  monstrous,  and  insupportable  doctrine,  that  the  child  who 
tells  an  untruth,  to  save  itself  from  punishment,  is  as  guilty  as  the 
parricide  who  cuts  his  father's  throat!  and  accuses  Catholics  of  being 


308  DEBATE    ON    THE 

immoral,  because  they  do  not  subscribe  to  such  a  doctrine  as  this! 
What  is  the  effect  of  this  doctrine,  that  all  sins  are  equal  1  Why,  it 
is  this  :  that  the  man  who  has  committed  the  slightest  sin,  is  as  guilty 
in  the  sight  of  God,  and  as  deserving  of  being  damned,  as  if  his  sins 
were  ever  so  enormous.  "  If  this  be  my  lot,"  is  his  spontaneous  rea- 
soning, "  I  see  no  cause  why  my  passions  should  not  have  all  the  ad 
vantage  of  this  doctrine.  I  will,  therefore,  continue  to  sin.  No  na- 
tural law,  no  divine  legislation,  no  civil  convention,  or  moral  restraint, 
shall  debar  me  of  my.  pleasures."  This  is  revolting;  it  is  horrible 
Scripture,  reason,  and  Catholicism,  anathematize  it.  I  now  resume 
he  proof  of  my  position,  touching  indulgences,  and  maintain  that  aftei 
the  eternal  guilt  is  remitted,  a  temporal  pain  is  often  inflicted  for  the 
satisfaction  of  divine  justice.  Thus,  when  Adam  and  Eve  had  sinned 
in  paradise,  when  they  had  incurred  the  Divine  displeasure,  and  heard 
the  dread  sentence  pronounced  against  them  and  their  posterity,  even 
in  his  wrath  the  Almighty  remembered  mercy.  They  were  driven 
from  Eden,  but  not  into  hell.  In  other  words,  the  eternal  guilt  of  their 
sin  was  forgiven,  but  the  temporal  punishment  still  remained  to  be 
endured.  (There  is  some  doubt  whether  Eve  partakes  of  her  consort's 
happiness  in  heaven,  or  not;  but  Adam,  we  are  assured  by  scripture, 
is  in  heaven.)  "  In  the  sweat  of  thy  brow  shalt  thou  eat  thy  bread," 
said  the  Lord,  "  the  earth  shall  be  accursed  in  thy  toil,  briars  and 
thorns,"  &c.  We  are  bearing  a  part  of  their  punishment.  We  feel 
the  effects  of  this  primeval  prevarication.  The  whole  earth  is  a  hospi 
tal.  Poverty,  crime,  disease,  war,  pestilence,  and  famine ;  physical 
moral,  and  mental  afflictions,  and  evils;  all  the  quarreling;  all  the 
differences  of  opinion-;  this  very  controversy;  all  this  is  a  part  of 
the  temporal  punishment  of  our  first  parents'  transgression.  This 
shews  the  difference  between  the  temporal  and  eternal  punishment  of 
sin.  Behold  another  illustration.  David  takes  Uriah's  wife — he  orders 
Uriah  into  the  front  of  the  battle  that  he  might  be  killed.  The  Al 
mighty,  incensed  at  his  double  crime,  sends  his  prophet  to  rebuke  him, 
and  David  trembles  before  his  wrath.  God  is  moved,  and  pardons 
him.  He  remits  the  eternal  guilt  of  his  sin,  but  not  its  temporal  punish- 
ment. "The  child  that  is  born  for  thee  shall  die."  We  know  all  the 
evils  that  followed  ;  Absalom,  &c.  The  doctrine  of  indulgences  is  this  ; 

WHEN  A  HUMAN  BRING  DOES    EVERY    THING    IN    HIS    POWER  TO  ATONE  FO* 

SIN,  God  has  left  a  power  in  the  church,  to  remit  a  part  or  the  entire  Oa 
the  temporal  punishment  due  to  it.  It  is  always  understood,  that  u. 
matter  what  the  church  does,  the  indulgence  is  of  no  effect,  if  the  ."? 
pentance  be  not  sincere.  I  will  give  you  a  striking  example  fron 
scripture.  It  is  the  case  where  St.  Paul  absolved  the  incestuous  ma> 
of  Corinth,  2d  Cor.  ii.  6,  8,  who  had  been  guilty,  even  in  the  early  ag« 
of  the  church,  of  a  crime  which  struck  the  hearts  of  all  the  church 
with  dismay.  St.  Paul  wrote  to  Corinth  and  said,  when  he  heard  that 
the  man  was  overwhelmed  with  contrition,  and  shunned  by  all  the 
people,  "To  him  that  is  such  a  one  this  rebuke  is  sufficient,  that  is 
given  by  many.  And  to  whom  you  have  pardoned  anything,  I  also 
For  what  1  have  pardoned,  if  I  have  pardoned  any  thing,  for  j'our  sakes 
have  I  done  it  in  the  person  of  Christ."  One  text  is  worth  twenty 
arguments.  The  obedience  rendered  to  St.  Paul  on  this  occasion,  by 
the  church  of  Corinth,  my  friend  denounces.  But  the  early  christians 
wrere  more  humble,  and  Paul  was  guilty  of  no  assumption  in  demand 


KOMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGIOR  309 

ing  it.  "In  the  person  of  Christ," — mark  those  words — that  he,  in 
the  person  of  Christ,  forgave — what  1 — not  the  eternal  guilt  of  the  in- 
cestuous man— God  alone  could  forgive  that ;  hut  the  temporal  punish- 
ment ;  to  r.estore  him  to  the  privileges  of  the  church  and  of  christian 
society.  Nothing  is  more  frequent  in  the  ecclesiastical  history  of  the 
early  ages,  than  the  narrative  of  the  acts  of  the  martyrs ;  and  this, 
among  others,  of  their  being  visited  in  prison,  or  met  in  their  way  to 
execution,  by  persons  condemned  to  perform  public  penances,  accord- 
ing to  the  discipline  of  the  church  in  those  days,  and  supplicated  for  a 
ticket,  or  other  intimation  of  intercession  in  their  behalf,  with  the  pas- 
tors of  the  church,  that  the  term  of  these  penances  might  be  abridged, 
in  consideration  of  the  martyr's  generous  sacrifices.  One  drop  of 
Christ's  precious  blood  was  sufficient  to  ransom  a  thousand  worlds. 
He  left  this  treasur;.' and  its  keys  to  the  church,  saying,  "Whatever 
you  shall  loose  on  earth,  it  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven,"  &c.  But  I  will 
give  you  other  examples  to  illustrate  the  doctrine  of  indulgences.  The 
English  church  grants  indulgences.  Luther  granted  them,  of  an  extra- 
ordinary kind  too.  Our  government  grants  indulgences.  An  insolvent 
debtor  hangs  his  head  with  shame;  there  is  nothing  he  would  not  do 
to  pay  his  debts.  The  law  takes  him  to  jail — he  gives  a  schedule  of 
his  property,  and  upon  surrendering  all  he  possesses  in  the  world,  upon 
oath,  he  is  allowed  to  take  the  benefit  of  the  act.  This  is  what  the 
church  does  to  sinners,  who  sincerely  repent  and  do  all  they  can,  first, 
to  pay  the  spiritual  debts  that  stand  against  them.  Shew  me  that  there 
is  anything  wrong  in  the  insolvent  laws,  and  then  you  may  find  fault 
with  the  practice  of  the  church.  As  for  the  pope,  or  bishop,  giving  a 
license  to  sin,  I  will  repeat  as  often  as  it  is  repeated,  that  the  Catholic 
church  reprobates  it.  If  all  the  bishops  in  the  world,  and  the  pope 
were  to  sign  such  a  license,  the  sinner  would  not  be  forgiven,  if  he  re- 
mained in  sin.  God  himself  does  not  pardon  sin  upon  these  terms. 
But  I  cannot  consent  that  the  gentleman  should  force  down  oui  throats 
doctrines  that  we  abominate. — [Time  expired.] 

Fbur  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

RealTy,  my  friends,  it  would  seem  as  if  I  ought  to  go  back  some 
two  or  three  days  to  help  my  opponent  forward  to  the  subject  now 
before  us.  But  I  will  not.  There  is  no  person  in  this  house,  with 
the  exception  of  my  ingenious  opponent,  who  believes  that  I  repre- 
sent all  sins  as  equal  as  respects  man.  Though  as  respects  the  di- 
vine law,  as  already  observed,  they  are  equally  trans'gressions  of  it. 
Hence,  as  .lames  the  apostle  avers  :  "  He  that  offends  in  one  point,''^ 
^  though  he  should  keep  every  other,  "  is  guilty  of  aW!  The  gentle- 
man, then,  may  defend  his  "  white  lies,"  and  other  violations  of  God's 
law,  as  he  pleases ;  but  God  will  show  the  universe  that,  as  respects 
his  character,  as  Lawgiver  and  King,  the  least  infraction,  as  respect^ 
mauv  is  the  highest  Insult  that  can  be  rendered  to  the  Lawgiver. 
Eve's  "  little  sin,"  as  the  infidels  call  it,  is  the  best  exposition  of  the 
logic  of  Roman  theology.  Though  it  differs  much  in  the  estimation 
of  man  from  the  treachery  of  Jiyias  :  yet,  does  not  every  page  and 
letter  in  man's  sad  history,  bear Witness,  that  even  the  pulling  off  an 
apple  against  the  law  of  God,  is  an  offence  that  justifies  the  Gover- 
nor of  the  Universe  for  having  suffered  the  whole  creation  on  out 


310  DEBATE    ON    THE 

planet  to  groan  and  travail  together  in  pain  and  death  for  .housands  of 
years. 

To  the  unpropitious  destiny  of  my  opponent  I  attribute  all  liis  re- 
marks on  my  saying  that  I  read  no  tracts  in  confutation  of  transub- 
stantiation.  Does  that  prove  that  I  cannot  refute — or  that  I  have  not 
refuted  his  defence  of  it.  The  bible  alone  qualifies  me  to  expose  all 
his  sophistry,  or  that  of  any  man,  on  that  grossest  and  most  un- 
feasible of  all  the  impostures  that  have,  in  any  age  or  nation,  been 
obtruded  on  mankind. 

The  gentleman  has  spoken  of  various  natural  transubstantiations 
Astonishing!  Who  ever  thought  any  thing  else,  but  that  all  organi- 
zed bodies,  all  earthly  substances,  nay,  indeed,  that  all  matter  was 
susceptible  of  real  changes,  and  new  combinations  and  transubstanti- 
ations ?  B>it  where  is  the  analogy  ?  They  are  real  and  apparent, 
visible  and  sensible  transubstantiations.  But  the  universe  affords 
no  transubstantiation,  similar  to  that  for  which  the  Bishop  contends — 
Nothing  transubstantiated,  and  yet  the  same  to  all  our  sense  and 
reason. 

But  in  the  name  of  reason  itself,  what  distress  or  pressure  of  mis- 
fortune has  induced  this  learned  gentleman  to  appeal  to  the  miracle 
in  Cana  of  Galilee — to  the  transubstantiation  of  water  into  wine  1  That 
was  really  a  transubstantiation.  It  did  not  look  like  water — taste 
like  water,  smell  like  water,  nor  operate  like  water.  It  was  real  wine, 
in  color,  taste,  smell,  and  all  its  sensible  properties.  What  a  refuta- 
tion has  the  gentleman  found  in  his  own  illustration  ! ! 

The  Bishop's  remarks  upon  "  eating  the  word,''''  &c.  &e.,  are  equal- 
ly unhappy,  and  extravagant.  He  has  not  done  himself  any  honor  on 
this  occasion.  Jesus  said,  "  it  is  my  meat  and  my  drink  to  do  the 
will  of  him  that  sent  me."  Truth  is  an  aliment  of  the  soul,  and  do- 
ing the  will  of  heaven  is  a.  feast  to  every  christian.  But  can  the  soul 
feast  on  literal  flesh  and  blood  ]  !    'Tis  an  outrage  on  common  sense ! 

I  was  glad  to  hear  him  even  quote  the  w^ords,  "  Judge  you  what  I 
say  :''  any  appeal  to  reason,  any  w  ord  favorable  to  examination,  com- 
ing from  that  quarter,  falls  on  my  ear  like  the  sound  of  the  dulci- 
mer. Jesus  says,  "  W  by  do  you  not  of  yourselves  judge  what  is 
right;"  and  Paul  says,  "Judge  what  I  say;"  and  John  commands, 
"  Believe  not  every  spirit ;  but  try  the  spirits,  for  many  false  prophets 
are  gone  forth  into  the  world."  Now  all  these  commands  are  address- 
ed to  the  common  mass  of  christians.  Well,  then,  says  Paul,  "  The 
loaf  for  which  we  give  thanks,  is  it  not  the  communion  of  the  body  ol 
Christ,"  &c.  ;  '.'  and  the  cup  which  we  bless,  is  it  not  the  communion 
of  the  blood  1"  &c. :  and  the  whole  is  called  the  Lord's  table,  the 
Lord's  supper — an  institution  in  semembrance  of  one  that  is  absent, 
"  TILL  HE  COME  :" — uot  the  eating  of  one  present,  but  the  memorial 
of  one  absent.  "  You  then,"  says  Paul,  "  do  show  forth  the  Lord's 
death  till  he  come.'^ 

^  The  Corinthian  abuses  show,  that  they  had  no  notion  of  a  wafer 
and  no  wine — of  a  mass,  a  transubstantiation.  Paul  reproved  them 
for  their  irregularities,  and  said  this  was  not  to  eat  the  LorcTs  supper^ 
(not  to  panake  of  a  mass)  :  for  some  had  eaten  and  even  drunk  to  excess. 
The  rich  had  brought  a  large  suppe\^and  put  the  poor  to  shame,  who 
had  no  supper  to  bring.  These  were  abuses  which  could  never  have 
arisen  out  of  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  In  one  word,  tiiere 
was  as  much  transubstantiation  in  the  passover,  because  it  is  called  thn 


BOMAN    CATHOIJC    RELIGION.  Jjll 

*♦  Lord's  passover,"  as  there  is  in  the  institution  of  the  supper,  be- 
cause it  is  called  the  "  Lord's  body  :"  and  he  that  cannot  thus  "  dis- 
cern the  Lord's  body,"  in  this  institution,  is  not  to  be  reasoned  with 
on  any  religious  question. 

Next  comes  the  gentleman's  splendid  episode  on  the  identification 
of  the  unfortunate  Scotus,  whose  peculiar  age  and  country  I  am  no 
more  bound  to  remember,  or  to  tell  here,  than  I  am  to  relate  the  per- 
sonal or  family  history  of  every  individual  I  quote.  How  many  au- 
thors are  daily  quoted,  whose  age  and  country,  not  one  in  a  hundred, 
may  be  able  to  relate  with  historic  accuracy  !  Are  those  who  cite  Co- 
pernicus, Zoroaster,  Euclid,  or  even  Newton,  obliged  to  tell  when  or 
where  they  were  born,  lived  and  died  ?  It  is,  however,  on  the  au- 
thority of  Bellarmine  I  quoted  this  celebrated  Roman  Catholic  au- 
thor, and  ought  I  not,  on  such  an  endorsement,  to  regard  Scotus  as  of 
hlo;h  authority  in  the  Roman  church  ? 

rime  is  becoming  very  precious,  and  as  I  have  only  two  speeches 
after  to-day,  I  shall  not  go  farther  into  the  details  of  the  proposition, 
now  under  discussion,  especially  as  I  have  not  been  met  by  the  Bish- 
op on  the  two  grand  errors  which  nourish  and  sustain  the  baseless 
dream  of  purgatory  and  the  sacraments  of  penance,  auricular  confes- 
sion, the  mass,  &c.  &c. 

Indulgence  is  not  identical  with  absolution,  as  my  opponent  seems 
to  argue.  Indulgence,  as  the  term  imports,  is  a  licence  to  sin  :  abso- 
lution is  the  forgiveness  of  sin.  An  indulgence  gives  licence  to  sin, 
because  it  promises  the  person  prospectively  an  exemption  from  the 
punishment ;  and  even  to  remain,  in  full  force,  in  the  moment  of 
death ! 

My  seventh  proposition  says : 

"The  Roman  Catholic  religion,  if  infallible  and  insusceptible  of  reformation 
as  alleged,  is  essentially  anti-An;erica:i,  being  opposed  to  the  genius  of  all  free 
institutions,  and  positively  subversive  of  them,  opposing  the  general  reailingof 
the  scriptures,  and  the  dillusion  of  useful  knowledge  among  the  whole  commu- 
nitj,  so  essential  to  liberty  and  the  permanency  of  good  government." 

"Essentially  anti-American." — ^This  I  have  so  far  proved,  as  refer- 
ence has  already  been  made  to  those  doctrines,  which  make  the  Roman 
Catholic  population  abject  slaves  to  their  priests,  bishops,  and  popes— 
to  that  hierarchy,  which  has  always  opposed  freedom  of  thought,  of 
speech,  and  of  action,  whether  in  literature,  politics,  or  religion.  Such 
are  the  laws  of  mind — such  the  intellectual  and  moral  constitution  of 
man,  that  if  in  religion  the  mind  be  enslaved  to  any  superstition,  espe- 
cially in  youth,  it  rarely  or  ever  can  be  emancipated  and  invigorated. 
The  benumbing  and  paralizing  influence  of  Romanism  is  such,  as  to 
disqualify  a  person  for  the  relish  and  enjoyment  of  political  liberty. 
For  in  all  history,  civil  liberty  follows  in  the  wake  of  religious  liberty ; 
insomuch,  that  it  is  almost  an  oracle  of  philosophy,  that  religious  liberty 
is  the  cause,  and  political  liberty  an  effect  of  that  cause,  without 
which  it  never  has  been  foimd.  Compare  not  Protestant  America  with 
the  republics  of  Greece  or  Rome;  for  there  is  scarcely  any  point  of 
coincidence  in  this  respect.  There  never  was  on  earth  so  free  and  so 
equitable  an  institution  as  the  Protestant  institutions  of  these  United 
States. 

We  shall  now  exemplify  the  spirit  and  tendency  of  Romanism,  taken 
from  the  five  hundred  years  in  which  it  was  most  triumphant. 

As  a  specimen  of  that  abject  slavery  of  Romzmists  to  their  superiors, 
/ 


312  DERATE    ON    THE 

and  of  the  humility  of  the  popes,  of  which  my  friend  has  so  ofteh 
spoken,  take  the  following  example. 

"  According  to  (his  doctrine  then  current  at  Rome,  in  the  last  Latei-an  great 
synod,  under  the  Pope's  nose,  and  in  his  ear,  one  bishop  styled  him  Pnnce  of 
the  world;  another  orator  called  him  King  of  kinors,  and  Monarch  of  the  earth; 
another  great  prelate  said  of  him,  that  he  had  all  power  above  all  powers, 
both  of  heaven  and  earth.  And  the  same  roused  up  Pope  Leo  X.  in  these  brave 
terms-:  "Snatch  up  therefore  the  two-edged  sword  of  divine  power,  committed  to 
thee;  and  enjoin,  command,  and  charge,  that  an  universal  peace  and  alliance  be 
made  among  christians  for  at  least  ten  years;  and  to  that  bind  kings  in  fetters 
of  the  great  king,  and  constrain  nobles  by  the  iron  manacles  of  censures:  for 
to  thee  is  given  all  power  in  heaven  and  in  earth." 

"This  is  (he  doctrine  which  Barronius,  with  a  Roman  confidence, doth  so  often 
assert  and  drive  foi-ward,  saying,  "that  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  it,  but  that  the 
civil  principalify  is  subject  to  fhe  sacerdotal:  and  that  God  hath  made  the  poli- 
tical government  subject  to  the  dominion  of  the  spiritual  church,"  Epis.  Patrac. 
Sess.  10,  n.  ]3;3.     Barronius,  Annals,  57.  23. 

It  is  Barronius,  and  not  Du  Pin,  says,  "that  God  has  made  the  poli- 
tical government  subject  to  the  spiritual.^''  This  is  the  true  doctrine  of 
popery.     But  we  shall  hear  another  great  cardinal. 

Again  Bcllarmine  says;  "  By  reason  of  the  spiritual  power,  the  pope,  at  least 
indirectly,  hath  a  supreme  power  even  in  temporal  matters." 

Concerning  which,  Dr.  Barrow  rightly  observes,  "If  the  pope  may 
strike  princes,  it  matters  not  much  whether  it  be  by  a  downright  blow 
or  slantingly." 

We  shall  now  very  hastily  run  back  from  A.  D.  1585  to  730,  and 
give  a  few  specimens  of  the  true  spirit,  and  tone,  and  action,  of  this 
institution,  during  its  ascendency. 

A.  D.  1585.  "Tlie  bull  of  Pope  Sixtus  V.  against  the  tipo  sons  of  wrath, 
Henry,  King  of  Navarre,  and  the  Prince  of  Conde,  beginneth  thus:  'The  au- 
thority given  to  St.  Peter  and  his  successors,  by  the  immense  power  of  the  eter- 
nal king,  excels  all  the  powers  of  earthly  kiftgs  and  princes. — It  passes  uncon- 
trollable sentence  upon  them  all — and  if  it  find  any  of  them  resisting  God's  or- 
dinance, it  takes  more  severe  vengeance  of  them,  casting  them  down  from  their 
thrones,  though  never  so  puissant,  and  tumbling  them  down  to  the  lowest  parts 
of  the  earth,  as  the  ministei-s  of  aspiring  Lucifer.'  And  then  he  proceeds  to 
thunder  against  them,  '  We  deprive  them  and  their  posterity  forever  of  their 
dominions,  and  kingdoms;'  and  accordingly  he  depriveth  those  princes  of  their 
kingdoms  and  dominions,  absolveth  their  subjects  from  their  oaths  of  allegiance, 
tjid  forbiddeth  them  to  pay  any  obedience  to  them.  'By  the  authority  of  these 
presents,  we  do  absolve  and  set  free  all  persons,  as  well  jointly  as  severally, 
from  any  such  oath,  and  from  all  duty  whatsoever  in  regard  of  dominion,  fealty 
.and  obedience,  and  do  charge  and  forbid  all  and  everv  of  them  that  they  do  not 
dare  to  obey  them,  or  any  of  their  admonitions,  laws,  and  commands."  Bulla 
Sixti  V.  Contra  Henr,  Navarre,  R.  &c. 

Is  this  the  genius  of  our  government  1  Are  these  the  doctrines  of 
the  United  States  1  Here  you  have  kings  hurled  from  their  thrones 
nd  subjects  released  from  their  allegiance,  without  ceremony,  by  the 
vicars  of  Christ  and  the  head  of  the  church!  Who  is.  this  that  sets 
aside  oaths,  and  religious  obligations,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord? 
*' Why,"  says  the  modern  Roman  Catholic,  "do  you  bring  up  these 
old  things  V  Not  so  very  old  !  But  will  the  bishop  mentioa  tlie 
council  that  ever  repudiated  this  doctrine? 

The  bishop  says,  '  they  have  been  repudiated.'  I  thank  him  for 
conceding  that,they  once  existed  !  But  now  for  the  proof  of  their  re- 
pudiation. Nothing  is  infallible  but  a  general  council ;  and  what  gene- 
ral council  has  set  since  the  days  of  pope  Sixtus  V.  1 ! !  The  council 
of  Trent  convened  Dec.  13,  1515,  and  all  its  decrees  were  confirmed 
by  the  pope  Jan.  26,  1564;  consequently,  the  bull  of  pope  Sixtus  V 


ROM.VN    CATHOLIC    nXLIGION.  313 

is  the  bull  »f  the  Reformed  Infallible  Roman  church  after  the  council 
ofTrrnt! !     If  it  were  orthodox  then,  it  is  orthodox  now. 

We  shall  now  hear  pope  Pius  V.  (almost  canonized,)  excemmuni- 
cate  the  queen  of  England,  and  for  aught  I  know,  we  Protestants  were 
ail  excommunicated  at  the  same  time. 

A.  D.  1570.  "  He  that  reigiieth  on  high,  to  whom  is  given  all  power  in  heaven 
and  ill  earth,  hath  committed  the  one  holy,  Catholic  and  Apostolic  church,  out 
of  which  there  is  no  salvation,  to  one  alone  on  earth,  namely,  to  Peter,  prince 
of  the  apostles,  and  to  the  Roman  pontid',  successor  of  Peter,  to  b*-  governed 
with  a  plenitude  of  power;  this  one  he  hath  constituted  prince  ovei  all  nations 
and  all  kingdoms,  that  he  might  pluck  up,  destroy,  dissipate,  ruinate,  plant, 
and  build." — And  in  the  same  bull  he  declares,  that '  he  thereby  deprives  the 
queen  of  her  pretended  right  to  the  kingdom,  and  of  all  dominion,  dignity,  ana 
privilege  whatsoever;  and  absolves  all  the  nobles,  subjects,  and  people  of  the 
kingdom,  and  whoever  else  have  sworn  to  her,  from  their  oath  and  all  duty 
whatsoever,  in  regard  of  dominion,  fidelity  and  obedience."  [Camp.  Hist, 
anno.  1570. 

That  this  was  not  peculiar  to  one  individual,  but  of  the  spirit  of  the 
system,  appears  from  the  following  facts: 

Pope  Clement  VI.  did  pretend  to  depose  the  Emperor  Lewis  IV. 

Pope  Clement  V.  in  the  great  synod  of  Vienna,  declared  the  emperor  subject 
to  him,  or  standing  obliged  to  him  by  a  proper  oath  of  fealty.  TClem.  lib. 
ii.  tit.  9. 

Pope  Boniface  VIII.  hath  a  decree  extant  in  the  canon  law  running  thus  : 
'  We  declare,  say,  define,  pronounce  it  to  be  of  necessity  to  salvation,  for  every 
human  creature  to  be  subject  to  the  Roman  pontifl." 

A.  D.  1294.  "For  one  sword,  saith  he,  must  be  under  another,  and  the  tem- 
poral authority  must  be  subject  to  the  spiritual  power: — whence,  if  the  earthN 
power  doth  go  astray,  it  must  be  judged  by  the  spiritual  power."     Ibid. 

This  definition  says  Dr.  Barrow,  at  the  foot  of  whose  pages  we  have  the  Latin 
original  of  all  these  decrees,  might  pass  for  rant  of  that  boisterous  pope  (a  mac 
above  measure,  ambitious  and  arrogant)  vented  in  his  passion  against  kmg  Philip 
of  France,  if  it  had  not  the  advantage  (of  a  greater  than  which  no  papal  decree 
is  capable)  of  being  expressly  confirmed  by  one  of  their  general  councils;  for 
'We  (saith  Pope  Leo  X.  in  his  bull  read  and  passed  in  the  Lateran  council)  do 
renew  and  approve  that  holy  constitution,  with  approbation  of  the  present  holy 
council.'  Accordingly  Mech  Cauns  saith,  that  '  the  Lateran  council  did  renew 
and  approve  that  extravagant  (indeed  extravagant)  constitution:'  and  Barro- 
nius  saith  of  it,  that  •  all  do  assent  to  it,  so  that  none  dissenteth  who  do  not  by 
discord  fall  from  the  church.' 

The  truth  is,  pope  Boniface  did  not  invent  that  proposition,  but  borrowed  it 
from  the  school;  for  Thomas  Aquinas  in  his  work  against  the  Greeks,  pretend- 
eth  to  show,  that  U  is  of  necessity  to  salvation  to  be  subject  to  the  Roman 
Pontiff'." 

The  appendix  to  Mart  Pol  saith  of  pope  Boniface  VIIT.  '  Regem  se  Regiim, 
JHfindi  J\ionarcham,7inicuTn  in  spiritttalibtis  et  temporalibus  Dominvm promul- 
gavi!;'  that  he  openly  declared  himself  to  be  the  king  of  kings,  monarch  of  the 
world,  and  sole  lord  and  governor  both  in  spirituals  and  temporals. 

Before  him,  pope  Innocent  IV.  did  hold  and  exemplify  the  same  notion;  de- 
.^laring  the  emperor  F'rederick  II.  his  vassal,  and  denouncing  in  his  general  coun- 
cil of  Lyons,  a  sentence  of  deprivation  against  him  in  these  terms:  We  having, 
about  the  foregoing  and  iiianv  other  his  wicked  miscarriages,  had  before  a  care 
ful  deliberation  with  our  brethren  and  the  holy  council,  seeing  that  we.  although 
unworthy,  do  hold  the  place  of  Jesus  Christ  on  earth,  and  that  it  was  said  uut-j 
us  in  the  person  of  St.  Peter  the  apostle,  whatever  thou  shaltbind  on  earth — the 
said  prince  (who  hath  rendered  himself  unworthy  of  empire  and  kingdoms,  and 
of  all  honor  and  dignity,  and  who  for  his  iniquities  is  cast  away  by  God,  and  that 
he  should  not  reign  or  command,  being  bound  by  his  sins  and  cast  away,  and 
deprived  by  the  Lord  of  all  honor  and  dignity)  do  show,  denounce,  and  accor- 
dinglv,  by  sentence,  deprive;  absolving  all  who  are  held  bound  by  oath  of  alle- 
giance fiom  such  oath  forever;  by  apostolical  authority  firmly  prohibiting,  that 
lio  man  liencefoi-th  do  obey  or  regard  him  as  emperor  or  king;  and  decreeiug, 

2  B  40 


314  DEBATE    ON    THE 

that  whoever  shall  hereafter  yield  advice,  or  aid,  or  faror  to  h'nti  as  iraperor  oi 
king,  shall  immediately  lie  under  the  band  of  excommunication." 

Before  him,  pope  Innocent  the  third,  (that  true  wonder  of  tiie  worH,  and 
changer  of  the  age,)  did  affirm  the  pontifical  authority  so  much  to  exceed  the 
royal  power,  as  the  sun  doth  the  moon;  "and  apphetn  to  the  former  that  of  the 
prophet  Jeremiah:  Ecce,  consliiui  te  super  gentea  et  regna; — see,  I  have  sel 
thee  over  the  nations  and  over  the  kingdoms  to  root  out  and  to  pull  down,  and 
to  destroy  and  to  throw  down,"  &c. 

Articue  xxiii.  Pope  Pius  IV.  "  I  do  acknowledge  the  holy  Catholic  and 
apostolic  Roman  church  to  be  the  mother  and  mistress  of  all  churches;  and  I 
do  promise  and  swear  true  obedience  to  the  bishop  of  Rome,  the  successor  ot 
Peter,  the  prince  of  apostles,  and  the  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,"     [Time  expired,} 

ffalfpast  4  o'clock,  P.  M. 
Bishop  Purcf  j.  rises — 

My  friends,  -Ir.  Kinmont  will  read,  before  I  close,  what  Liguori  says  oi» 
the  subject  of  Mr.  Smith's  charges  against  the  Catholic  church.  It  affords 
me  more  pleasure  tlian  I  can  express,  to  hare  an  cpponunily  of  proving,  by  a 
gentleman,  who  is  not  a  Catholic,  and  therefore  is  a  disinterested  witness,  as  far 
as  I  and  my  religion  are  concerned,  that  it  is  all  a  base  slander. 

We  have  heard  a  great  deal  about  the  pope's  deposing  kings,  and  absolving 
subjects  from  their  oaths  of  allegiance,  and  so  on.  In  your  presence  and 
hearing  therefore,  I  am  going  to  put  my  friend  into  one  of  the  most  terrible  di- 
lemmas in  which  he  has  ever  been  placed  in  his  life.  Now,  sir,  (addressing 
Air.  C.)  suppose  you  had  been  livixig  at  the  time  of  the  American  Revolu 
tion,  and  were  witness  to  the  tyranny,  which  tliese  colonies  had  to  endure, 
on  the  part  of  his  most  gracious  majesty,  king  George  III.  of  England  :  when 
the  spirit  of  a  mighty  and  a  numerous  people  was  roused  by  excess  of  wrong, 
to  make  one  vast  effort  for  freedom.  Under  these  circumstances,  the  Gene- 
ral in  chief,  the  officers,  and  the  army,  the  revenue  department,  and  post- 
masters, all  of  whom  had  taken  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  that  king,  appeal  to 
vou,  inquiring,  what  is  to  be  done  ]  Asking  you  if  the  oath  was  binding 
What  would  be  your  reply  1 

Mr.  Campbell.  If  they  had  taken  a  solemn  oath,  they  should  not 
break  it. 

BisHor  PcRCELL.  Then  was  George  Wasliington  a  peijurer,  and  all  the 
officers  of  the  army  and  navy,  all  the  signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence, and  all  the  subjects  of  the  king  of  Great  Britahi  were  perju- 
rers! ! 

Mr.  Campbkll.     That  does  not  follow  from  my  answer  to  your  question. 

Bishop  Pdkckll.  And  what  would  you  have  persons  to  do,  who  had 
taken  the  oath  of  allegiance  T 

Mr.  Campbell.  "  It  is  better  not  to  vow,  than  to  vow  and  not  pay" — aa 
saith  the  good  Book. 

Mr.  Campbell  rose  and  said,  that  for  his  part,  we  should  always  do  our 
duty,  and  leave  consequences  to  God.  When  he  intends  the  deliverance  of  a 
people,  he  will  effect  for  them  redemption,  as  he  did  for  his  people  out  of 
Egypt 

Bishop  Purcbll.  There  is  no  oath  of  artificial  contrivance,  stronger  than 
the  natural  tie  between  the  subject  and  the  king,  the  governed  and  the  gov- 
ernment ;  of  whatever  form  it  may  be.  This  is  an  oath,  prior  and  superi  )i-  lo 
all  other  oaths.  But  if  those  of  the  colonists,  who  had  not  taken  a  conventional 
oath,  or  an  oath  of  office,  to  tlie  king  of  England,  had  alone  rebelled,  what  could 
they  have  donel  Were  not  the  army  and  the  civil  and  military  officers  bound  b> 
llieir  oath  to  resist  rebellion  1  How  then  could  human  rights  have  been  \  ii» 
dicated,  or  human  wrongs  redressed  \   You  have  repeatedly  said  "  vox  p»puti^ 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  315 

nox  I)ei,'^  in  the  course  of  this  discussion  ;  in  other  words  that  the 
people's  will  was  the  most  authentic  interpretation  of  the  will  of  God, 
that  it  could  give  a  call  to  the  ministry  and  give  to  its  choice  a  right 
to  exercise  spiritual  powers  ! !  Thus,  my  friends,  you  see  the  dilem- 
ma to  which  the  gentleman  has  been  reduced,  and  that,  while  Catho- 
lics are  reproached  for  their  slavish  tenets,  he  himself  teaches  the 
whole  doctrine  of  passive  obedience,  and  condemns  the  very  principle 
of  the  American  Revolution.  I  leave  you  to  reflect  on  what  the  gen- 
tleman has  uttered.  Now  mark  the  difference.  Had  my  friend  deci- 
ded my  question,  as  the  Father  of  his  country  did  similar  ones,  he 
would  have  been  sustained  by  the  voice  and  the  spirit  of  the  American 
people — and  of  all  denominations  thereof,  both  Catholics  and  Protest- 
ants, the  contemporaries  of  a  struggle  in  which,  they,  who  engaged  at 
this  side  the  water,  "  periled  every  thing  but  their  sacred  honor." 
Whereas,  the  pope,  when  he  absolved  from  their  oath  the  English 
Catholfcs,  whose  were  the  lands,  and  the  houses,  the  churches  and  the 
schools,  the  hospitals  and  the  glory  of  England  ;  whose  sufferings  ex- 
ceeded those  of  the  American  colonists  as  much  as  the  Alleghanies  do 
a  grain  of  sand,  decided  upon  far  better  grounds  than  did  the  sages  of 
our  Revolution,  that  passive  obedience,  under  such  circumstances, 
ceased  to  be  a  virtue.  Yet  one  word  more — the  absolution  was  con- 
sidered by  those  very  Catholics,  an  exceeding  of  his  powers,  and  they 
did  not  act  upon  it.     His  decision  was,  for  them,  no  article  of  faith. 

My, friend's  next  resort,  in  the  way  of  documentary  evidence,  is  to 
the  Encyclopapdia  of  religious  knowledge,  just  published.  He  does 
not  know  the  author,  or  the  entire  title  of  the  work,  nor  the  history  of 
its  "  getting  up."     Fessenden  is  the  autlior  of  the  volume. 

Mr.  Campbell.     I  do  know  the  author,  but  bishop  Purcell  does  not. 

Bishop  Purcell.  That  is  Protestant  Jesuitism.  He  is  the  pub- 
lisher. In  the  New  York  Churchman  of  a  recent  date,  there  is  a  story 
told  of  a  most  egregious  imposture  practised  on  the  patrons  of  this 
same  volume.  The  editors  professed  to  give  the  views  of  the 
different  sects,  in  the  very  words  of  their  respective  standards,  or  ac 
credited  writers,  and  carefully  disguised  the  fact,  that  it  was  to  be  sub- 
servient to  the  interests  of  one  particular  sect,  the  Baptists.  They  ap- 
plied to  an  Episcopal  minister,  to  write  an  article  on  Episcopacy,  and 
to  patronize  the  publication.  This  looked  like  fair  play — the  poor 
minister  was  caught  in  the  snare  and  signed  his  name  recommending 
the  Encyclopaedia.  But  lo  !  when  the  work  appeared,  it  was  wholly 
opposed  to  Episcopalianism  ;  and  this  flagrant  violation  of  the  faith 
due  to  the  public  from  the  publishers,  elicited  a  most  cutting,  but  at 
the  same  time,  most  merited  castigation  from  the  (Episcopal)  Church- 
man. I  hope  the  article  will  be  read,  by  every  sincere  enquirer  after 
truth,  that  he  may  be  able  to  appreciate,  according  to  its  value,  this 
new  humbug. 

We  come  back  to  the  Jesuits.  It  was  so  notorious  to  Frederick, 
the  Great,  of  Prussia,  that  the  Jesuits  had  been  calumniated,  and  most 
foully  dealt  with,  that,  Protestant,  as  he  was,  he  received  them  in  his 
dominions,  and  placed  them  in  many  of  his  colleges.  He  told  the  other 
kings  of  Europe  that  they  would  soon  be  sorry  for  the  expulsion  of  an 
order  that  had  done  so  much  for  literature  and  science.  *'The  day  will 
come,"  said  he,  "when  you  will  be  offering  me,  300  pounds  for  a  pro- 
curator, 400,  for  a  professor,  600,  for  a  Rector,  and  a  ptr  valorem^  foi 


S16  DEBATE    ON    THE 

inferior  officers  of  the  Jesuits,  but  depend  upon  it,  I  will  fleece  you 
well.  I  will  make  you  pay  dearly  for  your  folly."  Frederick  was  a 
great  judge  of  human  nature,  my  friends,  and  he  had  a  keen  sense  of 
the  superior  claims  of  the  Jesuits,  for  good  scholarship,  and  morality. 
Hence  his  kingdom  and  his  palace  were  given  them,  with  his  own 
confidence.  The  celebrated  preacher,  Bourdaloue,  was  a  Jesuit,  and 
who  has  ever  preached  a  sounder,  or  a  purer  morality  ? 

My  worthy  friend  said,  the  Jesuits  supported  kings  and  monarchs, 
and  were  for  crushing  the  people;  and  most  grossly  did  he  contradict 
himself,  by  stating  almost  at  the  same  moment,  that  they  were  the  most 
formidable  enemies  of  kings,  and  it  was  for  their  opposition  to  their 
measures,  that  kings  banished  them  from  several  of  the  kingdoms  of 
Europe.  Thus  they  were,  according  to  his  account,  the  supporters  of 
kings  and  the  enemies  of  kings !  The  infamous  Pombal  of  Portugal 
began  the  crusade  against  the  Jesuits.  Read  his  history,  and  it  will  be 
their  best  vindication — or  see  them  among  the  savages  of  Paraguay  ! 
This  word  alone  reveals  to  the  intelligent  reader,  a  series  of  wonders 
performed  for  God,  humanity  and  virtue,  such  as  the  world,  perhaps, 
has  never  witnessed  since  the  establishment  of  Christianity. 

Next  comes  the  theocracy  of  the  Jews.  And  is  not  Jehovah  our 
king  also  1  Is  he  not  ever  Lord  over  all  ]  Do  we  not  acknowledge 
that  there  is  no  power  but  from  him  ]  My  argument  was  this.  If  it 
be  essentially  incompatible  with  liberty,  to  obey  the  same  ruler  in 
temporal  and  ecclesiastical  things,  God  could  not  have  established 
such  a  government  on  earth.  But,  God  did  establish  such  an  author- 
ity;  therefore,  it  is  not  incompatible  with  liberty.  I  do  not  wish  to 
see  it  now,  unless  God  should  vouchsafe  to  be  as  manifestly  our  king, 
as  he  was  the  king  of  the  Jews ;  which  is  not  to  happen  under  the 
Christian  dispensation,  as  it  did  under  the  old  law.  Christ  has  de- 
clared, that  his  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world.  My  worthy  opponent 
said,  that  the  fleshly  body  and  the  heavenly  body  of  Christ,  were  not 
the  same.  I  ask,  then,  what  became  of  his  fleshly  body  1  Did  it  rot 
in  the  ground  1  I  call  on  him  to  answer  this  question.  "Thou  wilt 
not  leave  my  soul  in  hell,"  says  David,  "nor  wilt  thou  suffer  thy  Holy 
One  to  see  corruption.''''  (Ps.  xv.  10.)  It  was  spiritualized,  but  still 
the  same  body,  according  to  what  he  said  to  his  disciples,  frighted  at 
this  apparition,  supposing  they  had  seen  a  spirit :  "  See  my  hands  and 
my  feet  .•  it  is  myself:  handle  and  see  ,•  for  a  spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones, 
as  you  see  me  to  have."  (Luke  xxiv.  39.)  He  is  "ever  living," 
(Heb.  vii.  25,)  to  make  intercession  for  us,  by  the  eloquent  mouths  of 
his  wounds,  which  he  exhibits,  for  us,  to  his  Father  in  heaven.  He 
gave  them,  as  he  had  previously  done  to  Thomas,  the  signs  they 
asked;  while  he  reprehended  them,  as  he  did  that  apostle,  ^'' for  slow- 
ness of  belief^  It  was  thus  that,  when  the  Jews  murmured  for  meat 
in  the  wilderness,  loathing  as  light  food  the  manna  of  heaven,  God 
gave  them  meat  to  satiety  ;  and  afterwards,  for  their  unbelief,  not  only 
excluded  them  from  the  land  of  promise,  but  scattered  their  carcases 
in  the  desert. 

My  friend  told  you,  how  much  afraid  he  was  of  Catholics.  My 
friends,  what  a  pretty  tale  he  made  of  it.  I  was  really  going  to  say : 
"  Poor  baby,  do  not  be  so  afraid  :  do  not  be  such  a  coward  :  shake  oflF 
those  old  woman's  fears  about  raw  head  and  bloody  bones,  and  be 
more  manly."     Washington,  though  he  lived  in  a  less  enlightened 


ROMAN   CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  317 

age  than  this,  was  not  afraid  of  Catholics.  They  stood  by  his  side  in 
the  battles  for  freedom.  They  never  flinched,  even  at  the  cannon's 
mouth.  When  he  drew  his  sword  for  this  republic,  they  followed  its 
beaming  to  victory  or  to  death.  La  Fayette,  and  hosts  of  others, 
whose  chaplains  had  said  mass  for  them  in  the  morning  before  the 
engagement,  bled  or  conquered  in  the  trenches  of  liberty.  And  never 
was  greeting  more  cordial,  or  triumph  more  glorious,  than  theirs, 
when  they  mingled  their  salutations  and  tears  with  those  of  their 
American  companions  in  arms,  at  the  surrender  of  Lord  Cornwallis, 
in  York-Town.  Witness,  too,  those  noble  poles,  (Kosciusko !  may 
his  shade  rise  up,  and  rebuke  this  spirit  of  intolerance  !)  the  Irish,  the 
South  Americans,  all  fighting  for  liberty,  all  Catholics.  Look  at 
William  Tell,  a  Roman  Catholic.  Go  to  Venice,  for  five  hundred 
years  a  republic,  though  surrounded  by  absolute  governments.  Look 
at  the  little  republic  of  San  Marino,  of  which  John  Adams  has  related 
the  remarkable  history.  There  is  not  such  a  people  for  liberty,  on  the 
globe,  as  the  Roman  Catholics.  Look  nearer  home,  at  Maryland, 
where  the  Catholics  were  the  first  that  proclaimed  freedom  of 

C0NSCiE^'CE  IN  THE  WESTERN  HEMISPHERE  !  !  LeT  THIS  BE  OUR  ANSWER 
TO  A  THOUSAND  SLANDERS. 

I  come  now  to  the  oath  of  bishops.  I  have  taken  the  oath  of  alle- 
giance to  the  United  States.  It  was  the  first  I  ever  took.  So  have 
all  my  brethren  in  the  episcopacy  taken  it.  The  head  of  the  Catholic 
eiiurch  in  the  United  States,  is  an  American ;  so  is  a  large  number  of 
our  clergy.  The  rest  preferred  this  country,  believing  there  was  here, 
what  their  own  country  denies,  what  our  constitution  guarantees,  lib 
erty  of  conscience.  The  oath  that  the  bishops  take,  is  not  a  recogni- 
tion of  any  temporal  power  of  the  pope,  out  of  his  own  territory,  called 
the  States  of  the  Church,  in  Italy.  We  would  never  take  the  oath  in 
the  odious  sense,  which  my  opponent  would  force  upon  it.  This  so- 
lemn and  authentic  abjuration  should,  alone,  be  sufficient  to  settle  this 
account ;  for  I  surely  know  what  I  swear  to,  and  that  what  I  here 
state  will  be  seen  and  read  by  those,  whom  no  human  fear  could  deter 
from  denouncing  me  for  error,  if  I  could  be  guilty  of  any,  on  a  point 
with  which  I  ought  to  be  so  well  informed.  The  arms  of  our  warfare 
are  not  carnal,  but  spiritual.  He  that  takes  the  sword,  we  believe 
with  Jesus  Christ,  will  die  by  the  sword.  Hence,  we  assume  no  ob- 
ligations by  that  oath,  but  such  as  God  imposes;  and  those  to  be  dis- 
charged in  his  own  divine  spirit  of  meekness,  charity,  and  good  will. 
It  is  cruel  to  impute  to  us  crimes,  and  to  insist  that  we  hold  doctrines, 
which  we  disavow.  Suppose  I  were  so  base,  as  to  suborn  two  or 
three  wicked  men,  to  calumniate  my  friend  Mr.  Campbell,  and  to  pre- 
tend that  he  was  in  active  correspondence,  for  treasonable  purposes, 
with  some  foreign  king,  ought  my  opponent  to  be  condemned  unheard  1 
And,  in  the  absence  of  proof,  should  we,  in  spite  of  all  his  protesta- 
tions to  the  contrary,  condemn  him  on  suspicion  ?  And,  if  any  family 
had  tnei:  reputation  blasted  by  some  base  miscreant,  ought  this  to 
destroy  their  estimation  in  society,  where  his  baseness  is  known  1  All 
the  ministers  in  the  world  may  exert  their  talents  and  influence,  to 
preserve  and  promote  peace  and  love  among  mankind ;  but  as  long  as 
diflTerences  in  religion  are  suflfered  to  create  jealousy,  distrust,  and  ha- 
tred between  brethren ;  and  certain  men  make  it  thtir  trade,  to  go 
from  town  to  town,  for  the  express  purpose  of  fanning  these  embers 
2  b} 


318     '  DKBATE    ON    THE 

of  discord,  fomenting  this  hatred  ;  so  long  will  the  purest  and  best 
men  continue  to  be  the  victims  of  the  malevolent,  and  our  religion,  and 
our  constitution,  prove  to  be  no  more  than  the  idlest  day-dream.  All 
the  kings  and  states  of  Europe,  Protestant  and  Catholic,  know  that 
the  bishops  take  that  oath,  and  yet,  in  none  of  them  is  a  bishop  looked 
upon  with  distrust.  In  Prussia,  Sweden,  Denmark,  England,  tho 
government  never  molests  a  bishop  about  an  oath,  which  is  known  to 
contain  nothing  at  which  the  most  captious  statesman  could  justly  take 
exception.  Is  not  this  sufficient  proof,  that  there  is  in  that  oath  ri^th- 
ing  of  what  my  friend  attributes  to  it.  I  assure  him,  Catholic  bish- 
ops are  not  the  enemies  that  this  republic  needs  to  fear. 

Every  argument  my  friend  employs  against  the  Eucharist,  only 
proves  him  an  inconsistent  reasoner,  or  a  deist,  as  far  as  the  argument 
goes.  The  paschal  lamb  was  a  figure  of  the  eucharist,  and  the  figure 
was  surely  nobler  than  the  reality,  if  we  have  nothing  better  than  a 
bit  of  bread  in  the  eucharist.  But  the  apostle  tells  us  that  the  weak 
and  beggarly  elements  of  the  Jewish  rites,  were  to  obtain  their  glori- 
ous fulfilment  in  the  land  of  grace — and  only  in  the  Catholic  church 
is  this  verified.  We  eat  the  paschal  lamb  sprinkled  with,  or  in  other 
words,  veiled  beneath  the  appearance  of  bread ;  and  every  objection 
urged  against  the  real  presence  is  equally  strong,  or  weak  against  the 
incarnation.  Can  this  paste,  saj's  Mr.  C.  be  God  ?  I  answer  by  an- 
other question  :  can  this  informal  embryo  in  a  virgin's  womb  be  God  1 

We  come  now  to  Scotus.  The  gentleman  says  he  heard  or  saw 
him  quoted  by  the  Catholics.  He  says  many  people  quote  Zoroas- 
ter and  Confucius  without  knowing  any  thing  about  them.  There  is 
no  parallel  between  them.  If  a  man  quotes,  as  evidence,  a  writer, 
like  Scotus,  he  ought  to  know  who  he  was.  I  do  not  blame  him  for 
knowing  nothing  of  Chinese  theology.  But  of 'Christian  theology, 
it  is  a  shame  for  a  man,  who  pretends  to  be,  himself,  a  teacher  in  Isra- 
el, and  a  polemic,  who  challenges  Catholic  bishops,  to  be  so  grossly 
ignorant. 

My  friend  says  we  bow  to  the  pope.  In  England,  Protestants  bow 
to  the  foot-stool  of  the  throne.  I  bow  to  any  friend  I  meet — I  do  not 
pay  him,  nor  the  pope  divine  honor.  We  know  the  meaning  of  our 
own  bows,  and  words,  and  oaths,  and  would  not  pledge  them  insin- 
cerely, much  less  blasphemously.  No  wonder  that  the  pope  lei  him- 
self be  persuaded  to  do  good,  in  the  case  cited  by  my  friend.  Should 
he  have  preferred  a  contrary  course  1     Have  done  evil  ] 

Temporal  power  is  inferior  to  spiritual  power,  as  human  power  is 
inferior  to  divine;  just  as  heaven  is  superior  to  earth,  in  dignity  and 
value,  and  God  superior  to  creatures,  in  every  divine  excellence,  but 
not  in  the  sense  that  he  who  has  been  invested  with  spiritual  power 
by  God,  has  also  been  invested  by  him,  in  a  kingdom  which  is  not  of 
this  world,  with  temporal  power.  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  greatest 
scholar  of  the  13th  century,  and  eminent  scholar  in  the  dark  ages, 
read  his  works,  with  those  of  a  Kempis,  for  proofs  of  Catholic  piety, 
instead  of  garbled  extracts  from  forgeries,  and  the  works  of  apostates, 
whom  we  discarded  from  our  communipn  for  immoralities,  which  no 
Protestant  communion  would  tolerate.  They  breathe  the  spirit  of 
devotion,  the  spirit  of  God. 

My  friends,  Mr.  Kinmont  will  now  tell  you  whether  the  pretended 
quotation  of  Mr.  Smith  from  Liguori,  is  correct.  You  will  recollect 
that  Mr.  Smith  said,  that,  according  to  Liguori,  the  Catholic  church 


ROMAIf    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  319 

allows  priests  to  keep  concubines  upon  a  fine.  Upon  hearing  this  I 
at  once  said  that  the  charge  was  an  infamous  falsehood ;  and  I  will 
now  show  that  Liguori  said  no  such  thing;  that  Liguori  sa^s  the  con- 
trary. If  I  tell  a  falsehood  Mr.  Kinmont  will  confound  me ;  if  I 
do  not,  somebody  does.  Thus  truth  will  triumph  and  falsehood  he 
confounded. 

Mr.  Kinmont.  I  am  called  on  in  my  professional  character  sim- 
ply, r -xd  have  no  part  or  lot  in  this  debate,  (Mr.  K.  is  understood  to 
be  a  Swedenborgian)  I  sincerely  believe  they  are  disputing  about 
shadows,  and  that  both  parties  are  equally  in  the  wrong;  but  I  will 
d.)  what  I  can  to  assist  in  clearing  up  the  dilliculty  of  fact.  I  find 
it  stated  in  Samuel  Smith's  work  and  marked  as  a  quotation  from 
Liguori  under  the  article  headed  "concubines  of  clergy." 

CoNCUKl.NtS  OF  THE  Clehgv. — "  A  bishop  however  poor  he  may  be,  cannot 
appropriate  to  himseh"  pecuniary  fines  without  tlte  license  of  the  Apostolical 
See.  But  he  ought  to  apply  them  to  pious  uses.  Much  less  can  he  apply  those 
fines  to  Huy  thing  else  but  pious  uses,  which  the  Council  of  Trtnt  has  laid  upon 
Don-resicient  clergymen,  or  upon  those  clergymen  who  keej)  concubines." — Ligor. 
Ep.  Doc.  iMor.  p.  44-J. 

And  the  following  is  Smith's  commentary. — 

How  shameful  a  thing,  that  the  Apostolical  See,  as  they  call  it,  that  is,  that 
the  pope  o(  Rome,  should  enrich  his  coffers  by  the  fines  which  he  receives  from 
the  profligacy  of  his  Clergy!  If  they  keep  concufcrnes,  they  nmsl  paya_^«« 
for  it;  but  if  they  marry,  they  must  be  excommunicated!  This  accounts,  at 
once,  for  the  custom  in  Spain,  and  other  countries,  and  especially  on  the  island 
of  Cuba,  and  in  South  America;  where  almost  every  priest  has  concubines,  \\)ao 
are  known  by  the  name  of  nieces.  These  abandoned  men  are  willing  to  pay 
the  fine  rather  than  forego  the  gratification  of  their  lustful  appetites.  The 
"  Narrative  of  Rosamond,"  who  was  once  herself  one  ot  these  concu- 
bines, in  the  island  of  Cuba,  portrays  the  general  licentiousness  of  the  popish 
clergy,  in  colors  so  shocking,  that  the  picture  cannot  be  looked  at  without  a 
hlush.  Here  we  see  the  doctri-je  fully  exemplified  by  practice.  This  keeping 
of  concubines,  is  a  thing  so  common  in  thepopish  West  India  islands,  and  ia 
South  America,  that'll  is  rarely  noticed.  The  offspring  of  this  priestly  inter- 
course are  numerous.  They  are  known  to  be  the  children  of  the  priests;  but, 
because  it  is  the  general  cuslom,it  is  laicftd;  and  it  passes  off  merely  with  a 
joke  or  sarrasin. 

This  is  the  text  and  commentary  as  I  find  it  in  Mr.  Smith's  book. 
This  is  marked  as  Liguori,  p.  444.  If  taken  from  Liguori  at  all,  it  is 
taken  from  a  different  edition.  The  present  purports  to  be  a  complete 
copy  of  the  works  of  Liguori.  It  bears  no  mark  of  being  an  expur- 
gated edition.  It  is  said  to  be  an  edition  of  tvhat  was  said  and  written 
before  with  additions.  On  turning  to  the  place  where  he  treats  of  fines 
and  punishments  inflicted  for  concubinage,  he  says  that  priests  guilty 
of  this  offence,  were,  after  two  ineffectual  reprimands,  to  be  degraded 
from  their  functions.  He  refers  to  the  council  of  Trent,  and  states 
what  that  council  decreed.  Smith  throws  us  on  Liguori,  and  Liguori 
on  the  council  of  Trent.  There  is  nothing  in  Liguori  relating  to  that 
subject  but  this.  The  council  was  called  about  the  year  1542.  This 
edition  of  the  decrees  of  the  council  was  edited  by  the  council  itself. 
I  have  had  an  abstract  taken  which  I  will  read.  It  would  take  some 
time  to  read  the  original,  and  I  have  a  translation  made  by  one  of  my 
scholars.     I  will  read  this. 

"  In  the  records  of  the  decrees  of  the  council  of  Trent,  Session  25tli,  chap. 
14th,  there  is  described  the  method  of  proceeding  in  the  cases  of  clergj-,  who 
are  guiltv  of  concubinage. 

After  shewing  the  scandal  and  enormity  of  this  sin,  especially  in  clergy,  whosa 
i.Dtegrity  ol  life,  should  recommend  and  impress  the  precepts  of  religion  aim  of 


320  DEBATE    OVi    THE 

ihe  church ;  the  sacred  synod  forbids  that  anj-  individual  holding  the  clertcal 
office  shall  keep  at  his  house  or  elsewhere,  any  mistress  or  uncliastc  woman  or 
cohabit  with  aiTj' such,  under  the  penalty  ot'  having  enforced  against  him  the 
»acre.d  canons,  and  ecclesiastical  statutes  regarding  that  matter.  It  is,  then,  espe- 
cially enacted  that  if  when  admonished  by  their  superiors  they  shall  not  desist 
from  all  such  unlawful  and  forbidden  acts,  they  shall  be  deprived  of  the  third 
part  of  all  their  revenues  and  ecclesiastical  dues:  and  if  still  persevering  in  their 
course,  they  shall  not  even  heed  a  second  adoionition,  they  shall  be  deprived  of 
<i{/  their  ecclesiastical  reyenue  and  suspended  from  the  administration  of  eccle- 
siastical functions;  and  if,  during  this  suspension,  they  shall  continue  obstinate 
sad  incorrigible,  they  shall  be  declared  altogether  unfit  and  incorapeient  to  ex- 
ercise any  spiritual  office  whatever  belonging  to  the  church;  unless  after  a  cle-  - 
and  unequivocal  amendment  of  life,  the  church  should  think  proper  to  with- 
draw the  disqualification,  and  allow  them  to  resume  their  former  station  of 
honor  and  trusl.  But  if  after  the  resumption  of  the  duties  of  their  office,  they 
should  resort  to  those  impure  practices  which  they  had  abandoned,  besides  the 
infliction  of  the  above  named  penalties,  an  act  of  excommunication  with  its 
sword  of  justice  shall  cut  them  off,  as  dead  branches  from  the  body  of  the  faith- 
ful and  church  of  the  living  God.  And  it  is  farther  enacted  that  no  appeal,  or 
exemption  shall  hinder  the  execution  of  any  of  these  decrees,  but  that  they  shall 
be  summarily  executed,  at  the  will  of  the  bishop,  after  he  has  ascertained  the 
existence  of  the  enormities.  A  similar  provision  in  its  effects  and  spirit  is  made 
with  relation  to  bishops  themselves,  but  the  order  of  proceeding  is  different. 
This  is  in  substance  the  provision  of  the  decree  of  the  council  of  Trent.  Se» 
£5,  cap.  14.      [Time  expired.] 


SATURDAY,  January  21st,  Half-past  9  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

Under  any  other  circumstances  than  the  present,  I  should  have  in- 
sisted on  being  allowed  the  same  number  of  minutes  over  my  stipu- 
lated hour,  which  my  friend  has  taken  with  Mr.  Kinmont's  exposi 
tion,  over  his  usual  time. 

Bishop  Purcell. — ^I  have  no  objection  to  Mr.  Campbell's  occupy 
ing  that  much  more  time.      It  is  right  that  he  should. 

Mr.  Campbkll.  I  feel  obliged  to  the  gentleman  for  his  courtesy, 
and  will  therefore  proceed.  My  friends,  you  will  doubtless  have  ob 
served,  that  of  all  the  extracts  read  from  Ligori,  fojnd  on  the  paget 
of  Smith,  but  one  was  challenged  by  the^Bishop,  on  the  ground  that 
it  is  not  found  in  the  page  of  St.  Ligori  in  the  edition  now  before  us. 
The  case  is  simply  this.  According  to  the  moral  theology  of  the  church 
of  Rome,  marriage  is  a  greater  sin  than  concubinage :  for,  if  a  priest 
marry,  he  is  forthwith  excommunicated ;  but  if  he  keep  a  concubine 
he  only  pays  a  fine.  This  is  the  statement  that  Mr.  Smith  makes . 
and  translates  the  passage  in  Ligori  as  follows : 

"  A  bishop,  however  poor  he  may  be,  cannot  appropriate  to  himself  pecuniary 
fines  without  the  license  of  the  Apostolical  see.  But  he  ought  to  apply  them 
to  pious  uses.  Much  less  can  he  applj' those  fines  to  any  thing  else  but  pious 
uses,  which  the  council  of  Trent  has  laid  upon  non-resident  clergymen,  or  upon 
those  clerirymenwlio  keep  concubines."     Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444. 

Now,  Bishop  Purcell  denies  that  there  is  such  a  passage  in  Ligo- 
~ri,  or  that  there  is  in  the  council  of  Trent  any  such  arrangement ;  and 
in  proof  of  it,  he  has  brought  us  an  edition  of  St.  Ligori,  and  the  de- 
ciees  of  the  council  of  Trent.  But  the  edition  which  he  has  produ- 
ced, has  not,  upon  the  page  referred  to,  the  passage  quoted.  In  the 
passage  quoted,  the  reference  to  Ligori  is  to  a  decree  of  Trent.    But 


HO>IAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION  321 

ihere  are  always  two  ways  of  quoting  a  passage :  the  one  verbatim  ,• 
and  the  other,  substantially.  .Whether  Ligori  quotes  the  decree  of 
Trent  literally,  or  only  quotes  the  substance,  we  cannot  affirm.  The 
bishop  referred  this  matter  to  Mr.  Kinmont,  without  consulting  me. 
It  was  an  exparte  reference ;  and  therefore,  comes  not  fairly  before 
us.  Although  I  have  no  objection  to  Mr.  Kinmont;  bu^  on  the  con- 
trarj',  I  think  him  very  competent  to  decide  a  matter  of  this  kind,  if 
he  had  lime  to  examine  all  these  volumes :  and  perhaps,  had  I  been 
consulted,  I  should  have  agreed  in  selecting  him :  yet  as  the  refer- 
ence is  wholly  one  sided  ;  it  can  have  no  authority  here.  However, 
so  far  as  the  deqjfees  of  Trent  have  been  read,  they  do  speak  of  fines 
or  forfeitures  of  those  who  have  concubines,  and  these  do  substan- 
tially sustain  all  that  I  have  alleged. 

I  have  this  morning  received  a  paper  of  Mr.  Smith's,  in  which  ] 
find  an  article  "  on  the  authority  of  Ligori,''''  which  I  will  now  read. 

"  Alplioiisiis  de  Ligori  was  canonized  by  Pope  Pius  VII.  on  the  15th  of  Sep- 
tember, A.  D.  1815,  under  the  title  of  the  Most  Illustrious  and  Most  Reverend 
Lord  Alphonsus  de  Ligorio.  He  has  written  the  Modern  Theology  of  thf 
church  ot  Rome,  in  nine  large  volumes,  containing  4701  pages,  which  was  pub- 
lished at  Mechlin,  Svperiorum  Permissu,  A.  D.  1828. 

His  Theology  is  called,  in  the  preface  of  the  work,  "The  Light,"  His  doc- 
trine after  having  been  explored,  was  approved  of  by  Pope  Pius,  VII.  on  the 
18th  May,  1803,  after  the  Sacred  Congregation  of  Rites  had  given  it  their  sanc- 
tion, ancl  had  declared  that  there  was  NOTHING  IN  IT  worthi  of  CENSURE. 
Ligori  was  spoken  of  by  the  sacred  Pontift',  Leo  XII.  in  the  highest  terms;  and 
his  eminence  the  Serene  Cardinal  of  Castile,  the  Major  Penitentiary,  in  his  letters 
to  the  Bishop  of  Massilien,  lavs,  that  Saint  Ligori  is  not  only  an  ornament  to  the 
Episcffpal  character  by  the  illustrious  splendor  of  his  virtues;  hut  he  shines  re- 
splendent by  his  SOUND  doctrint;,  which  is  accordine^  to  God.  Doctrinani 
5anctani,ac  secundum  Deum."     (Pref.  Editoris.) 

In  his  preface  to  his  Synopsis  Mr.  Smith  observes : 

"If  they  deny  that  we  have  given  a  fair  translation,  we  will  then  challenge 
them  to  come  forward  in  a  public  assembly  with  the  works  of  St.  Ligori,  when  we 
promise  to  meet  them,  and  submit  our  translation,  and  the  original,  to  the  inspec- 
tion of  a  committee,  one  half  of  whom  to  be  chosen  by  ourselves,  and  the  other 
half  by  the  Roman  clergy.  Truth  never  s^huns  investigation.  If  we  have  not 
g^veu  a  fair,  genuine,  and  true  translation,  and  if  we  have  not  exhibited  the  doc- 
trines of  Ligori,  and  the  church  of  Rome  fairly  and  correctly,  without  garbling, 
or  giving  an  erroneous  construction,  we  will  be  willing  to  incur  the  consequences 
that  we  ousrht  to  expect,  for  liaving  deceived  the  public."     Synop.  Pref.  p.  12. 

I  will  thank  the  Bishop  to  inform  me  the  date  of  his  edition  of  the 
works  of  Ligori. 

Bishop  Purcell. — What  is  the  date  of  Mr.  Smith's  edition  I 

Mr.  Campbell.— 1828. 

Bishop  Purcell. — This  edition  [pointing  to  hi^  own")  was  also 
published  in  1828 :  so  that  it  appears  both  are  the  same. 

Mr.  Campbell  [here  taking  up  a  volume  of  the  Bishop's  copy  of 
Ligori  read]  "  Editio  Nova  EmendataJ'''  It  hence  appears  that  the 
Bishop's  is  a  new  amended  edition  ,•  so  that,  probably,  this  and  the 
one  used  by  Mr.  Smith  are  not  the  same.  Be  this,  however  as  it  may, 
nothing  is  lost  by  the.  examination  :  nothing  is  proved  against  Mr. 
Smith  as  a  translator,  and  I  shall  write  forthwith  to  New  York  to  Mr 
Smith  for  the  original  Latin  of  this  passage  in  his  edition,  and  have 
it  certified  and  published  among  this  community. 

But  were  it  lawful  to  read  in  this  assembly,  I  have  before  me  the  de- 
crees of  councils,  and  the  words  of  bishops  and  cardinals,  teaching 
the  very  doctrine  which  the  Bishop  would  represent  as  a  reproach 
or  calumny  on  his  clergy  and  church.     Here  is  the  decree  of  a  coun- 


322  DEBATE    ON    THE 

cil  at  Toledo,  and  here  are  references  to  various  councils,  such  as  Bh 
vii  Concilia,  Tom.  I.  pp.  737,  739.  Crabb.  Concil.  Tom.  I.  p.  449. 
Edition  of  1551,  and  Pithou  Corp.  Ju.  Canon,  p.  47,  as  quoted  by  Dr. 
Brownlee,  which  go  to  prohibit  priests  "from  keeping  more  than  one 
concubine"  and  declare  marriage  in  a  priest  to  be  "  a  mortal  sin." 
And  here  is  Costerus  and  cardinal  Campygio  who  taught  what  I  dare 
uot  read  here  ;  but  I  will  reserve  all  this  for  a  more  convenient  season. 
[Mr.  Campbell  here  called  for  the  reading  again  of  the  seventh 
proposition,  which  being  read  by  Mr.  Piatt,  one  of  the  Moderators, 
he  proceeded.] 

About  the  year  1088,  Urban  11.  decrees:  • 

"  That  subjects  are  by  no  authority  coiistiaint-d  to  pay  the  fidelity  which  they 
have  sworn  to  a  christian  prince,  who  opposeth  God  and  his  saints,  or  violateth 
their  precepts.'  An  instance  whereof  we  have  in  his  granting  a  privilege  to  the 
canons  of  Toiirs;  'which,'  saith  he,  *  if  any  emperor,  king,  prince,  &c.  shall 
wilfully  attempt  to  thwart,  let  him  be  deprived  of  the  dignity  of  his  boiiur  and 
power."     [Barrow,  p.  22. 

Again,  the  council  of  Toledo  still  more  fully  expresses  the  spirit 
of  the  age. 

"  We  the  holy  council  promulge  this  sentence  or  decree,  pleasing  to  God,  that 
whosoever  hereafter  shall  succeed  to  the  kingdom,  shall  not  mount  the  throne, 
till  he  has  sworn  among  other  oaths,  to  permit  no  man  to  live  in  his  kingdom, 
who  is  not  a  Catholic.  And  if  after  he  has  taken  the  reins  of  government,  he 
shall  violate  his  promise,  let  him  be  anathema  maranatha,  in  the  sight  of  the 
eternal  God,  and  become  fuel  of  eternal  fire — pabulum  ignis  asterni.  [Caranza, 
p.  404. 

Innocent  III.  (that  true  wonder  of  the  fxrorld  and  changer  of  the 
age)  affirms  : 

"  Under  Pope  Innocent,  III.  it  was  ordained,  that  if  any  temporal  lord,  being 
required  and  admonished  by  the  church,  should  neglect  to  purge  his  territory 
from  heretical  filth,  he  should  by  the  metropolitan  and  the  other  comprovincial 
bishops,  be  noosed  in  the  band  of  excomnmnication  ;  and  that  if  he  should  slight 
to  make  satisfaction  within  a  year,  it  should  be  signified  to  the  Pope,  that  he 
mig^ht  from  that  time'  denounce  the  subjects  absolved  from  their  fealty  to  him, 
and  expose  the  territory  to  be  seized  on  by  Catholics."     Barrow,  p.  22. 

Adrian  I.  A.  D.  772,  thus  decrees : 

"  We  do  by  general  decree  constitute,  that  whatever  king,  or  bishop,  or  po- 
tentate, shall  hereafter  believe,  or  permit,  that  the  censure  of  the  Roman  pon- 
tiffs may  be  violated  in  any  case,  he  shall  be  an  execrable  anathema,  and  shall  be 
guilty  before  God,  as  a  betrayer  of  the  Catholic  faith."  P.  Had.  I.  Capit  apud 
Grat.  Cans.  xxv.  qu.  1.  r    H. 

Leo  IX.  says,  that  Constantine  M.  "did  think  it  very  unhecoming 
that  they  should  be  subject  to  an  earthly  empire,  whom  the  Divine 
Majesty  had  set  over  an  heavenly."  Of  Gregory  II.  who  lived 
A.  D.  730,  Barronius  says,  "  He  effectually  caused  both  the  Romans 
and  Italians  to  recede  from  obedience  to  the  emperor."  "  So,"  con 
tinues  this  authentic  historian, — "  he  did  leave  to  posterity  a  worthy 
example  that  heretical  princes  should  not  be  suffered  to  reign  in  the 
church  of  Christ,  if  being  warned  they  should  be  found  pertinacious 
in  error."  To  consummate  the  whole,  Gregory  II.  did  say  to  the  em- 
peror Isauros :  "  All  the  kingdoms  of  the  west  did  hold  St.  Peter  as 
an  earthly  God." 

Wishing  to  crowd  as  much  into  this  speech  as  I  possibly  can  in 
one  hour,  I  shall,  with  as  much  rapidity  as  is  consistent  with  distinct- 
ness of  enunciation,  hasten  through  many  documents.  Thus  we  have 
seen,  that  for  at  least  five  centuries,  the  heads  of  the  Roman  church 
clearly  and  unambiguously  taught,  that  the  spiritual  sword  was  above 
the  temporal,  and  that  the  vicar  of  Christ  is  by  a  divine  right  Lord 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  323 

of  thrones  and  all  earthly  things.  This,  I  have  no  doubt,  is  the  true 
doctrine  of  the  immutable  and  infallible  church  of  Rome!  and  ceitain 
it  is,  that  it  has  never  been  disowned,  or  renounced,  by  a  general 
council,  the  organ  of  infallibility.  If  the  church  of  Rome  be  insus- 
ceptible of  reformation,  or  infallible;  it  is  proved  to  be  essentially 
anti- American,  and  opposed  to  the  genius  of  our  institutions. 

To  resume  the  bishop's  oath.  The  gentleman  at  length  admitted 
that  he  had  taken  the  bishop's  oath,  by  saying,  that  he  took  the  oath 
of  naturalization ^rs/  /  /  There  is  but  one  oath  for  Roman  bishops  in 
all  countries,  therefore,  the  Bishop  is  sworn  to  "  increase  and  advance 
the  authority  of  the  pope,"  and  persecute  and  oppose  (fight  against) 
heretics  and  schismatics.  If  he  have  not  taken  this  oath,  he  will  please 
refer  us  to  the  oath  he  has  sworn,  and  specify  its  peculiarities. 

The  defence  is  a  very  singular  one.  He  first  swore  allegiance  to 
the  United  States,  and  then  to  that  foreign  prince  the  pope.  Does  he 
mean,  contrary  to  common  usage,  that  the  first  oath  is  more  binding 
than  the  second ;  or,  that  it  neutralizes  the  anti-American  attributes 
of  the  second.  But  his  explanation  is  but  half  given  in  the  first  point, 
that  he  took  the  oath  of  American  allegiance  btfore  he  took  the  oath 
of  Roman  allegiance.  The  other  ground  of  defence  was  in  the 
query,  which,  with  such  a  triumphant  air,  he  put  to  me  yesterday 
evening — viz.  whether  I  would  not  have  been  justified  in  breaking 
my  oath  to  England,  had  I  been  an  American  colonist  or  soldier  at 
the  time  of  the  revolution,  when  the  king  tyrannized  over  the  Ameri- 
cans ?  I  have  already  answered  this  question,  and  have  affirmed  that 
in  Protestant  doctrine,  no  circumstance  or  contingency,  can  ever  ab- 
solve a  person  from  the  obligation  of  an  oath,  into  which  he  has  in- 
telligently and  voluntarily  entered.  It  is  in  the  estimation  of  chris- 
tians most  impious  and  daring  for  any  prince  or  pope  to  presume  to 
absolve  men  from  the  obligations  of  an  oath  solemnly  taken.  If,  in- 
deed, an'  oath  has  in  it  the  nature  of  a  covenant,  then  one  of  the 
parties  failing,  so  far  vacates  the  covenant  as  to  set  the  other  free 
from  his  oath  :  but  this  is  not  absolution  for  breaking  it;  it  is  a  simple 
annulling  of  its  conditions.  Now,  in  the  case  supposed,  the  king  of 
England  was  generally  allowed  to  have  receded  from  the  conditTons 
on  which  that  oath  was  taken  by  the  persons  who  renounced  alle- 
giance to  him  ;  he  having  failed  to  protect  and  cherish  his  American 
subjects,  according  to  the  tenor  of  the  charter  given,  they  were  freed 
from  the  obligations  of  allegiance.  But  I  beg  my  audience  to  re- 
member that  the  bishop  attempts  to  defend  himself  for  breaking  his 
oath  in  certain  contingencies :  else,  why  ask  me  such  a  question  % 
The  bishop's  plea  is,  therefore,  that  oaths  may  be  broken,  and  that 
the  pope  can  absolve  men  from  allegiance  on  a  justifiable  emergency, 
when  the  church,  or  some  other  great  interest  may  demand  it !  Of 
what  use  then  is  the  oath  of  naturalization  ] — 

That  the  incompatibility  of  the  bishop's  oath  with  our  oath  of  al- 
legiance may  be  obvious,  I  shall  quote  the  oath  of  naturalization,  as 
proposed  to  every  foreigner  by  the  laws  of  the  United  States: 

The  laws  ot' the  U.  S.  provide;  That  any  alien,  bein^  a  tree  white  person, 
may  be  admitted  to  become  a  citizen  of  the  U.  S.  or  any  ot  them,  on  the  follow  ■ 
ing-  condition,  and  not  otherwise:  That  he  shall  have  declared  on  oath,  or  affir- 
matioii,  before  the  supreme  superior,  district,  or  circuit  court,  of  some  one  of 
the  states,  or  a  court  of  recor  1  having  a  clerk  and  seal — 3  year»  at  least  before 
admission. 


324  DEBATE    Oy    THE 

Itt.  Oath  of  Intention. 

"Thiit  it  was  bonajide,  his  intention  to  become  a  citizen  of  the  U.  S.  and  io 
renounce  forever,  all  allegiance  and  fidelitj ,  to  anj  foreign  Prince,  Potentate, 
State  or  Sovereignty,  whatsoever;  and  particularl_^,  by  name,  the  Prince,  Poten- 
tate, State  or  Sovereignty,  whereof  he  may,  at  the  time  be  a.  citizen  or  stil'Ject. 

That  he  shall,  at  the  time  of  his  application  to  be  admitted,  declare,  on  oath 
or  atRrmation,  before  a  court  as  above. 

2d.  Oath  of  Renunciation,  .Objuration,  Sj-c.  and  of  Fidelity  on  Admission. 

"That  he  will  support  the  constitution  of  the  U.  S.and  that  he  doth  absolutely 
and  entirely  renounce  and  abjure  all  allegiance  and  fidelity  to  every  foreign 
Prince,  Potentate,  State  or  Sovereignty  whatever;  and  particularly  by  name 
the  Prince,  Potentate,  State,  Sovereignty  whereof  he  was  before  a  citizen  or 
■nbject. 

The  court  admitting  the  alien  to  be  satisfied  that  he  has  resided  five  years 
within  the  U.  S.  one  year  in  the  state,  and  that  he  has  behaved  as  a  man  of 
good  moral  character,  attached  to  the  principles  of  the  constitution  of  the  U.  S. 
and  well  disposed  to  the  good  order  and  happiness  of  the  same.  The  residence 
to  be  proved  by  a  witness,  not  by  oath  of  the  applicant. 

Where  a  person  coming  into  the  United  States  3  years  before  21  years  of  age, 
proving  same  character,  %nd  continued  residence  5  years,  admitted  as  before 
stated  on  the  first  application,  on  taking  final  oath  of  abjuration,  renunciation, 
fidelity,  &c.  without  the  first  oath  of  intention 

Further  provided;  That  in  case  the  alien  applying  to  be  admitted  to  citizen- 
ship, shall  nave  borne  any  hereditary  title,  or  been  of  any  of  the  orders  of  No- 
bility, in  the  kingdom  or  state  from  which  became,  he  shall  in  addition  to  the 
above  requisites,  make  an  express  renunciation  of  bis  title  or  order  of  Nobility, 
at  the  time  to  be  recorded,  &c. 

Further  provided — That  no  alien  who  shall  be  a  native  citizen,  denizen,  or 
subject  of  any  country,  state  or  sovereign,  with  whom  the  U.  S.  shall  be  at  war  at 
the  time  of  his  application,  shall  be  then  admitted  to  be  a  citizen  of  the  U.  S.' 
&c.  fro. 

Such  are  the  oaths  and  laws  of  naturalization.  Now,  as  the  pope 
of  Rome  is  a  forei^  prince — at  this  very  moment  a  prince  temporal 
as  well  as  spiritual,  exercising  political  authority  over  the  stales  of 
Rome,  and  claiminor  allegiance  in  temporals  as  well  as  spirituals, 
throughout  the  whole  Roman  Catholic  world  ;  T  ask,  can  any  one 
who  has  sworn  "  to  increase  and  advance  his  authority,''''  or  feeling 
himself  so  bound,  as  he  shall  answer  for  it  to  the  supreme  judge  of  the 
universe,  tx^e  or  keeji  the  oath  of  citizenship  in  this  country  without 
perjury  ?!     In  my  most  deliberate  judgment,  it  is  impossible. 

The  case  is  simply  this  :  The  oath  of  naturalization  requires  the 
candidate  for  citizenship  to  swear  that  he  does  absolutely  and  entirely 
revMunce  all  allegiance  and  fidelity  to  every  foreign  prince,  potentate, 
state,  or  sovereignty.  Now,  the  pope  of  Rome  is  a  sovereign  of  Eu- 
rope— a  foreign  potentate,  issuing  bulls,  laws,  or  briefs,  throughout 
the  world  :  often  to  secure,  augment  and  advance  his  authority,  in 
temporals,  as  well  as  spirituals  ;  as  the  testimony  of  500  years  now 
before  you,  amply  demonstrates ;  and  every  Roman  Catholic  layman 
feeling  a  paramount  obligation  to  his  bishop,  and  through  him  to  the 
pope  ;  and  all  the  rulers  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  being  sworn 
to  the  pope  absolutely  and  forever,  I  ask,  can  such  persons  ki  good 
faith  solemnly  swear  allegiance  to  this  government  1  If  a  person  can 
be  sworn  to  support  two  antagonist  constitutions,  governments,  powers, 
— two  masters,  as  opposite  as  the  poles :  then  may  he,  without  per- 
jury, swear  to  our  government,  and  to  that  of  papal  Rome  ! 

Bat  bishops  are  sworn  ,"  to  persecute  and  oppose  (persequar  et  in^- 
pugnaboj  heretics  and  schismatics.  Papal  Rome  is  and  always  has 
been,  a  persecuting  government.  She  is  essentially  so.  I  intend  not 
now  to  dwell  much  on  Uns  theme.  But  I  will  sustain  ray  proposition 


EOMAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGIOW.  32b 

And  first,  I  admit  that  Protestants  have  persecuted, — that  they  have 
persecuted  even  to  death  I  deny  it  not;  and  therefore  my  opponent 
need  not  prove  it.  It  is  'a  matter  of  record  indisputable  however, 
that  their  persecutions  have  not  been  as  a  drop  to  the  ocean,  in  compa- 
rison of  papal  persecutions.  Still  they  ha^  e  persecuted,  and  we  frank- 
ly own  it.  But  we  have  an  excuse  for  them.  The  first  Protestants 
after  the  Lutheran  Reformation,  came  out  from  a  bloody  and  cruel 
mother,  who  had  accustomed  them  to  blood  and  slaughter,  and  taught 
them  that  the  blood  of  heretics  was  a  sacrifice,  most  acceptable  to 
God.  They  were  taught  that  it  was  just  to  destroy  thieves,  rob- 
bers, and  murderers;  and  that  heretics  were  the  worst  of  thieves, 
robbers,  and  murderers,  and  ought  when  incorrigible  to  be  slain  :  for 
so  the  good  of  society  did  imperiously  demand. — As  soon  as  they 
got  out  of  the  great  city,  they  began  to  contend  among  themselves, 
whether  persecution  was  right.  They  soon  saw  it  was  of  the  manners 
and  customs  of  Babylon ;  and  that  "  all  who  take  the  sword  must 
perish  by  the  sword  ;"  therefore  they  laid  it  down.  They  have  ab- 
jured it  in  their  creeds  and  remonstrances  against  the  papacy ;  and  we 
rejoice  to  state  the  fact,  that  there  is  not  m  Protestant  Christendom 
a  single  creed  that  does  not  repudiate  persecution  and  assert  the  great 
principle  of  christian  and  religious  liberty. 

But  I  have  said  that  papal  Rome  is  essentially  a  persecuting  power 
— still  a  persecuting  monarchy ;  because  she  has  it  yet  written  in  her 
infallible  and  immutable  decrees  of  councils,  in  the  bulls  and  ana- 
themas of  her  popes ;  and  in  the  constitution  of  her  inquisitions,  which 
as  a  church  she  still  acknowledges  and  maintains.  A  few  of  her  in- 
fallible decrees  must  be  accepted  as  a  specimen. 

"  111  the  tilth  council  of  Toledo,  Can.  3rd,  the  holy  lathers  say,  '  We  the  holy 
council  proniulge  this  sentence,  or  decree  pleasing  to  God,  That  whosoever 
■  hereafter  shall  succeed  to  the  kingdom,  shall  not  mount  the  throne  till  he  hsis 
sworn  among  other  oaths,  to  permit  no  man  to  live  in  his  kingdom  who  is  not  a 
Catholic.  (Nullum  non  Catholicuni.)  And  if  after  he  has  taken  the  reins  of  go- 
vernment, he  shall  violate  this  promise,  let  him  be  anathema  maranatha  in  the 
sight  of  the  eternal  God,  and  become  fuel  for  the  eternal  fire,  (Pabulum  ignis 
a^teini.)     Caranza  Sum.  Conciliorum,  p.  404. 

The  great  Lateran  council  under  Innocent  III.  who  instituted  the  in- 
quisition and  transubstantiation,  has  still  more  expressly  decreed  : 

"  We  excommunicate,  and  anathematize  all  heresy,  condemning  all  heretics, 
by  what  names  soever  they  are  called.  *  »  *  *  » 

'  These  being  condemned,  must  be  left  to  the  secular  power  to  be  punished. 
And  those  who  are  only  suspected  of  heresy,  if  they  purge  not  themselves  in  the 
appointed  way,  are  to  be  excommunicated,  and  if  within  a  year  satisfaction  is  not 
given,  they  are  to  be  condemned  as  heretics. 

They  must  take  this  oath. — "  That  they  will  endeavor,  bona  fide,  and  with  all 
their  might,  to  exterminate  from  every  part  of  their  dominions  all  heretical  sub- 
jects, universally,  that  are  marked  out  to  them  by  the  church.  So  that  from 
this  time  forward,  when  any  one  is  promoted  to  any  power  temporal  or  spiritual, 
he  shall  be  obliged  to  confirm  this.  But  if  any  temporal  lord, being  required 
and  admonished  by  the  church,  shall  neglect  to  purge  his  lanct  from  this  here- 
tical filthiuess,  he  shall  be  tied  up  in  the  band  of  excommunication  by  the  me- 
tropolitan and  his  comprovincial  bishops.  And  if  he  should  neglect  to  make 
satisfaction  within  a  year,  it  should  be  signified  to  the  pope,  that  he  might  from 
that  time  pronounce  the  subjects  absolved  from  allegiance  to  him,  ana  expose 
his  territories  to  be  seized  on  by  Catholics,  who  expelling  heretics,  shall  pos- 
sess them  without  contradiction. 

But  Catholics,  who  having  taken  the  badge  of  the  cross,  shall  set  themselves 
o  extirpate  heretics,  shall  enjoy  the  same  indulgence  and  be  fortified  with  tha 
same  privilege  as  js  granted  to  those  who  go  to  the  recovery  of  the  holy  land." 
2  \j 


825  DEBATE    «y    THE 

And,  16  save  time,  be  it  emphatically  observed,  that  the  council  of 
Trent  fully  established,  adopted,  and  re-promulged  these  decrees,  and 
they  are,  at  this  moment,  iii  full  force  at  Rome.  Until,  then,  a  general 
council  is  called,  and  makes  fallible  the  decisions  of  the  great  Lateran 
council;  such  is,  and  must  be  the  dictum  and  belief  of  the  Roman 
church  ;.  and,  as  I  judge,  there  never  will  be  another  general  council 
this  will  ever  be  the  doctrine  of  papal  Rome,  till  the  day  of  her  death. 
Is  this,  I  emp'atically  ask,  the  genius  and  spirit  of  republican 
America  1 

But  edicts,  canons,  and  decrees,  are  not  a  dead  letter.  They  have 
been  all  personified,  and  acted  out  to  the  letter.  Who  has  not  heard 
of  that  personification  of  every  thing  that  is  diabolically  cruel — the 
Holy  Ofs-ice  of  the  Inquisition  1  What  abuse  of  language  !  Think 
not,  n^y  mends,  that  I  will  rake  up  its  ashes ;  that  I  will  rehearse  its 
horrible  racks,  and  engines,  and  instruments  of  torture ;  that  I  will 
describr  a  single  auto  da  fe,  one  of  the  horrid  tragedies  of  the  acts  of 
faitb,  whose  flagrance  language  fails  to  speak.  "  Ii  was  the  vice  of 
the  ap';,"  my  opponent  has  said.  Of  what  age  1  Of  Innocent  III.  1 
Of  the  era  of  transubstantiation  1  No,  indeed  ;  but  of  the  age  of  Na- 
poleon ;  of  the  age  of  pope  Pius,  the  saint  of  ^814  !  Yes,  of  the  pres- 
ent >ge  !  It  was  got  up,  indeed,  by  Innocent  (inapposite  name  !)  III., 
and  was  fully  in  operation  in  Italy,  A.  D.  1251.  Its  first  officer,  Do- 
minic, was  afterwards  made  a  saint !  In  Spain  and  Portugal  it  waa 
perfected ;  and  its  reign  of  terror,  in  unfigurative  truth,  transcends  all 
description  My  soul  sickens  at  the  thought.  In  Spain  alone,  from 
1481  to  1814,  about  half  a  million  suffered  by  it.  Lorente  (Paris 
edit.  tom.  iv.  p.  271,)  sets  down  the  victims  of  one  department  of  tor- 
ment, those  burnt,  at  33,912;  and  of  other  rigorous  punishments,  al 
291,450.  He  is,  by  other  historians,  supposed  to  be  far  below  the 
full  amount.  From  the  records  of  the  inquisition,  the  manuscripts 
taken  from  the  inquisitorial  palace  at  Barcelona,  when  taken  by  siege 
in  1828,  one  may  reckon,  that  in  all  Spain,  in  a  little  over  three  centu- 
ries, half  a  million  suffered  all  manner  of  cruelties  from  this  infernal 
tribunal. 

It  was  even  employed  as  a  means  of  converting  the  heathen,  in  pa- 
gan lands.  It  is  said,  that  800  persons  have  been  condemned  at  one 
session,  by  one  of  its  tribunals.  And,  still  worse,  in  Seville,  in  the 
year  1481,  2000  persons  were  condemned  to  the  flames,  and  20,000 
more  to  inferior  punishments.  Such  were  the  tender  mercies  of  these 
Roman  gospel  arguments  to  save  men's  souls  from  hell  !  It  was  the 
vice  of  a  dark  age,  and  yet  restored  by  Pius  VII.  in  1826!  !  What! 

But,  this  is  only  one  of  the  tribunals  of  persecution  ;  it  was  only 
one  of  the  means  of  persecuting  and  destroying  heretics  and  schis- 
matics. Shall  I  relate  the  persecutions  of  the  Waldenses  and  Albigen- 
ses,  and  other  Protestants,  sometimes  called  Lollards,  Wickliffites, 
Hugonots,  &c.  &c.?  Shall  I  tell  of  the  millions  in  France,  Spain, 
Portugal,  Holland,  England,  Ireland,  and  elsewhere  1  Shall  I  tell  of 
the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew's  day?  of  the  persecutions  conse- 
quent upon  the  revocation  of  the  edict  of  Nantz  ?  or  the  Irish  massa- 
cre? and  of  all  the  other  deeds  of  horror?  I  shall  not  attempt  it.  I 
cannot  describe  the  slaughter  of  two  millions,  in  the  early  crusades 
against  Jews  and  infidels;  nor  of  fifteen  millions  of  Indians  and  pa- 
gans ;  nor  of  a  million  Waldenses,  murdered  and  banished  in  a  single 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  S21 

generation  .  I  say,  again,  1  cannot  relate  these  heart-stirring  scenes  ; 
and  I  shall  only  say,  that  historians  and  raarlyrologists  variously  give 
the  aggregate  from  y?/'/y  to  sixiy^eight  millions  of  human  btings,  that 
have  been  sacrificed  and  devoured  by  this  Moloch ;  this  insatiable  de- 
mon of  persecution,  as  taught  in  theory  and  carried  out  in  practice,  by 
her  who  calls  herself  Holy  Mother  !  !  !  What  a  scarlet,  crimsoned, 
cruel  mol/ier  she  is!  On  her  will  be  avenged  the  blood  of  all  martyrs 
Even  the  persecutions  of  those  whom  she  taught  to  persecute,  lie  just- 
ly chargeable  against  her.  What  guarantee,  then,  have  we  that  this  be- 
ing the  native  spirit  of  the  system,  it  would  not  again  repeat  the  same 
tragic  scenes,  in  any  country  where  it  obtains  an  ascendancy  ?  'Tis 
true,  indeed,  that  the  Protestant  powers  in  Europe  hold  it  now  in 
check.  But,  were  these  removed,  from  what  premises  would  we  in- 
fer, that  the  same  means  would  not  be  resorted  to  in  this  and  every 
Protestant  country,  so  soon  as  this  kind  mother  should  feel  it  a  duty, 
"  to  extirpate  heresy"  out  of  the  land  ]  ! 

The  doctrine  is  actually  taught  in  her  New  Testament,  in  the  no..,^ 
appended  to  the  Rhemish  version.     I  will  give  you  a  passage  or  two. 

"And  when  his  disciples  James  and  John  had  seen  it,  they  said.  Lord  wilt  thou 
we  saj-  that  hre  come  down  from  heaven,  and  consume  them?  And  turmng^,  he 
rebuked  them,  saying;,  you  know  uot  of  what  spirit  you  are.'"      Luke  ix.54,  55. 

*'  Ver.  55.  He  rebuked  them.  Not  justice  nor  all  rigorous  punishment  of 
sinners  is  here  forbidden,  Elias'  fact  reprehended,  nor  the  cnurch  or  chris- 
tian priitces  blamed  for  putting-  heretics  to  death:  but  that  none  of  these  should 
be  done  for  desire  of  our  particular  revenge,  or  without  discretion,  and  regard 
to  their  amendment,  and  example  to  others.  Therefore,  Peter  used  his  power 
upon  Ananias  and  Sapphira,  when  he  struck  them  both  down  to  death  for  dt 
fraudiiig  the  church."     Rhem.  N.  Test.  p.  109.  , 

This  is  a  mistake.     Peter  struck  not  Ananias  and  Sapphira  for  dt 

{rauding  the  church,  (as  these  purblind  commentators  say  ;)  but  the 
lOrd  himself  struck  them  dead,  for  lying  ag-ainst  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Christian  princes,  thus,  in  reading  the  Roman  Testament,  are  taught 
to  put  heretics  to  death. 

"And  many  of  them  that  iiad  followed  curious  things,  brought  together  their 
books  ami  burnt  them  before  all:  and  counting  the  prices  of  them,  ttiey  found  the 
money  to  be  fifty  thousand  pence."  Acts  xix.  19.    • 

"  Ver.  19.  Books.  A  christian  man  is  bound  to  burn  or  deface  all  wicked  books 
of  what  sort  soever,  especially  heretical  books.  Which  though  they  infect  not 
him  always  that  keepeth  them,  vet  being  forth  coming,  they  may  be  noisome 
and  pernicious  to  otiier  that  shali  have  them  and  read  them  after  his  death,  or 
otherwise.  Therefore  hath  the  church  taken  order  for  condemning  all  such 
books,  and  against  the  reading  of  them  where  danger  may  ensue:  and  the  chris- 
tian emperors,  Constantius, Magnus,  Valentinian,  Theotlosius,  Marcian,  Justin- 
ian, made  penal  laws  for  the  burning  or  defacing  them."     lb.  p.  207. 

This  proscription  of  heretical  books  is  of  the  same  spirit,  a  part  of 
the  same  system,  and  explains  the  march  of  papistical  uniformity  and 
unity  ! 

"As  we  have  said  before,  so  now  I  say  again,  if  any  evangelize  to  you,  beside 
that  which  you  have  received,  be  he  anathema."     Gal.  i.  9. 

"  Hierome  useth  this  place,  wherein  the  apostle  giveth  the  curse,  or  ana- 
thema to  all  false  teachers,  uot  once,  but  twice,  to  prove  that  the  zeal  of  Catholic 
men  ought  to  be  so  great  toward  all  heretics,  and  their  doctrines,  that  they 
should  give  them  the  anathema,  though  they  were  never  so  dear  unto  them. 
In  which  case,  saith  this  holy  Doctor,  I  would  not  spare  mine  own  parents."  Id. 
p.  292. 

This  is  stronger  still.  "  I  would  not  spare  mine  own  parents  !' 
This  is  the  spirit,  the  naked  spirit  of  the  svstem,  pure  and  unmixed. 
V'jmember,  then,  my  friends,  that  childrei  ought  to  inform  against 


828  DEBATE    ON    THE 

their  own  parents,  and  brother  against  brother,  for  the  extirfiarion  fk 
heresy ! 

*'  And  I  saw  the  woman  drunken  of  the  blood  of  the  Saints  and  of  the  blood 
of  the  martyrs  of  Jesus."     Rev.  xvii.  6. 

Ver.  6.  DriiJiken  of  the  blood.  It  is  plain,  that  this  woman  sigrnifieth  the 
whole  corps  of  all  the  persecutors  that  have  and  shall  shed  so  much  blood  of 
the  just :  of  the  prophets,  apostles,  and  other  martyrs,  froiv,  the  beginning  of 
the  world  t&  the  end.  The  Protestants  possibly  expound  it  of  Rome,  for  that 
they  put  heretics  to  death,  and  allow  of  their  punishment  in  other  countries: 
But  their  blood  is  not  called  the  blood  of  saints,  no  more  than  the  blood  of 
thieves,  mankiilers,  and  other  malefactors:  for  the  shedding  of  which  by  order 
of  justice,  no  commonwealih  shall  atistcer."     Id.  p.  430. 

No  commonwealth,  consequently  no  niember  of  it,  shall  suffer  for 
iiillinff  heretics.  If  I  have  not  sustained  this  proposition,  1  can  prove 
nothing.  If  these  facts  and  documents  can  be  set  aside  i>y  rhetorical 
declamation,  or  reckless  denial ;  then  are  history,  and  testimony,  ana 
fact,  of  no  value  in  controversy. 

Another  specification  comes  under  this  proposition.  I  have  too  many 
3f  them  for  the  occasion.  I  must  be  brief.  This  is  the  divorcing,  re- 
pelling, disorganizing,  and  demoralizing  dogma,  that  "  no  faith  ^lould 
be  kept  with  heretics." 

Gregory  VII.,  in  a  council  at  Rome,  declares : 

"  We  following  the  statutes  of  our  predecessors,  do,  by  our  apostolic  author- 
ity, absolve  all  those  from  their  oath  of  fidelity,  who  are  bound  to  excommuni- 
cated persons,  either  by-duty  or  oath ;  and  we  unloose  them  from  every  tie  of 
obedience,  till  the  excommunicated  persons  have  made  proper  satisfaction." 
Decret.  2  part.  caus.  15.  quest.  6. 

Urban  II.  teaches  the  same  doctrine : 

"  You  are  to  discharge  the  soldiers  who  have  sicom  fidelity  to  count  Hugo 
from  paying  any  obedience  while  he  \n  "Trommiinicated:  for  they  are  not  obliged 
to  keep  that  lidelity  inviolate,  which  they  have  sicorn  to  a  christian  prince,  who 
opposes  God,  and  his  saints,  and  despises  their  precepts."     Ibid. 

Gregory  IX.  has  laid  down  the  general  principle,  with  the  greatest 
care  and  precision  : 

"  Be  it  known  to  all  who  are  under  the  dominion  of  heretics,  that  they  are 
set  free  from  every  tie  of  fidelity  and  duty  to  them ;  all  oaths  or  solemn  agree' 
ment  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding-."     Decret.  Oreg.  lib.  5,  tit.  7. 

Hear  now  the  decree  of  the  council  of  Constance,  in  the  case  of 
John  Huss,  and  Jerome  of  Prague  ;  who  appeared  there  under  the 
solemn  pledge  of  the  imperial  protection. 

"  Council  of  Coiijtance,  1414,  did  solemnly  decree  that  no  faith  is  to  be  kept 
with  an  heretic.  The  person  who  has  given  them  the  safe  conduct  tu  come 
thither,  shall  not  in  this  case  be  obliged  to  keep  his  promise  by  whatever  tie  he 
niav  have  been  engaged,  when  he  has  done  all  that  has  been  in  his  power  to  do." 
Bruce.    Free  Thonsrht.  p.  120. 

The  council  of  Constance  then,  not  only  so  decided ;  but  caused 
those  men,  who  appeared  before  them  under  an  imperial  pledge,  to  be 
taken  and  burned.  Thus  faith  was  not  to  be  kept  with  heretics  accord- 
ing to  said  decree,  and  the  practice  under  it  by  these  "  holy  fathers  V* 

To  confirm  the  whole  with  the  utmost  brevity  I  would  add,  the  ho- 
ly, infallible,  and  last  council  of  Trent  formally  recognized  this  de- 
cree of  the  council  of  Constance.  It  is  then  the  standing  and  unrepealed 
doctrine  of  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  which  must  be  as  immutable 
and  infallible  as  the  council  of  Trent. 

Next  we  must  notice  the  proscription  of  books  as  another  specifi 
cation. 

The  council  of  Trent  in  its  25th  session,  decreed  thai  .\  council 
vmder  the  pope  should  draw  up  and  publish  an  index  of  books  which 


KOJIAN    CATHOUC    RELIGION.  329 

were  to  be  prohibited  in  the  church.  Thus  commenced  and  keeping 
pace  with  the  introduction  of  liberal,  or  Protestant,  or  anti-Roman 
Catholic  volumes  it  has  grown  into  a  respectable  volume  ;  so  that 
one  of  the  finest  libraries  might  be  collected  out  of  these  proscribed 
books.  Among  these  is  the  bible,  which  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  prohibited  in  The  council  of  Toloso.  In  the  4th  of  the  10  rulea 
concerning  prohibited  books  established  by  the  Holy  Fathers  of  the 
council  of  Trent,  a  license  to  read  the  bible  is  put  into  the  control  of 
bishops  and  inquisitors.  But  he  that  presumes  to  "read  without 
such  license  cannot  receive  absolution  of  sins."  Among  these  prohib- 
ited books  also  are  those  of  Locke,  Milton,  Bacon,  Grotius,  Galileo, 
Claude,  Saurin,  Sir  Matthew  Hale,  Jeremy  Taylor,  Luther,  Calvin, 
Melapcthon, — afid,  indeed,  all  the  standard   Protestant  authors. 

Touching  the  liberty  of  the  press,  a  decree  of  the  10th  session  of 
the  Lateran  council  A.  D.  1215,  even  Leo  X.  presiding  expresses  the 
Roman  Catholic  views  of  that  chief  root  of  the  tree  of  liberty.  The 
decree  of  the  Lateran  council  was  sanctioned  by  Trent  and  is  now  the 
orthodox  faith  of  Rome. 

"  l}y  order  of  the  holy  council,  we,  in  fine,  ordain  and  decree,  that  no  person 
shall  presume  tc  print,  cr  cause  to  be  printed,  any  book  or  other  writing'  whatso- 
ever, either  in  our  city  (Rome)  or  in  an}'  other  cities  and  dioceses,  unless  it  shall 
first  have  been  carefully  examined,  if  in  this  city,  by  "bur  Vicar  and  the  master  of 
the  holy  palace,  or  if  in  other  cities  and  dioceses,  by  the  bishop  or  his  deputy, 
with  the  inquisitor  of  heretical  pravity  for  the  diocese,  in  which  the  said  impres- 
sion is  about  to  be  inpde  ;  and  unless  also  it  shall  have  received,  under  their  own 
hand,  their  written  approval,  given  without  price  and  without  delay.  Whoso- 
ever sliall  presume  to  do  otherwise,  besides  the  loss  of  the  hooks,  which  shall 
be  publicly  burned,  shall  be  bound  by  the  sentence  of  excoinnmnication." 
tjaran7,a,  p.  G70. 

The  council  of  Trent  has  also  confirmed  the  doctrine  of  Leo  X. 
and  his  Lateran  council  of  1515.  Their  first  rule  concerning  pro- 
scribed books  is  :  .4//  books  condemned  hy  the  supreme  pontiffs,  or  gen- 
eral councils  before  the  year  1515  and  not  comprised  in  the  present  index 
are  condemned,''^  The  creed  of  this  said  council  of  Trent  moreove; 
compels  every  Roman  Catholic  "  tp  receive  undoubtedly,  all  thii\ga 
delivered,  defined,  and  declared  by  the  sacred  canmis,  and  general  councils 
and  particularly  by  the  Holy  council  of  Trent  J'^ 

This  church  is  as  much  opposed  to  the  freedom  of  the  press  and 
free  discussion,  and  the  circulation  of  the  bible,  as  ever  she  was ;  but 
she  has  to  yield  a  little  to  that  irresistible  innovator,  called  custom. 
Still  however  a  Roman  bishop  cannot,  as  a  good  and  liege  subject  of 
the  pope,  but  oppose,  freedom  of  thought,  speech  and  action  in  ail 
matters  religious.  Listen  to  the  following  little  bull  of  the  bishop 
of  New  York,  published  the  other  day  against  free  discussion. 

In  this  document  the  bishop  writes,  in  his  address  to  the  editor  of  the  "Truth 
Teller," — "Sir,  I  consider  it  my  duty  to  request  you  to  publish  the  following 
copy  of  my  letter  to  the  editor  of  the  "  Catholic  Diary,"  in  order  to  obviate  as 
soon  as  possible,  the  miic/iif/'which  such  a  Society,  if  countenanced,  might  pro- 
duce. You  know  my  opposition  to  controversial  disputes  on  religion,  particular- 
ly in  debating  societies  or  newspapers." 

From  the  Tetter  alluded  to,  we  extract  the  following  : 

"To  the  Editor  of  the  Catholic  Diary  : — 

In  the  Catholic  Diary  of  Saturday  last,  October  1,  I  find  a  notice  from  you,  of 
B  Society,  calling  itself  the  New- York  Catholic  Society,  for  the  promotion  of 
religious  knowledge.  Of  the  existence  of  that  Society,  I  was  -utterly  ignorant 
and  feel  surprised  that  you,  who  ought  to  know  better,  would  think  of  encour- 
aging and  drawing  public  attention  to  such  a  society,  without  first  ascertaining 
the  sentiments  of  your  Ordinary  on  so  important  a  subject.  The  Church  wisely 
2c2  42 


330  DEBATE    ON    THE 

ordains  that  nothing  of  the  nature  of  this  society  can  be  estaBftshed  without  th« 
approbation  of  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  where  it  is  meant  to  introduce  it,  and 
that  permitted,  it  should  be  governed  by  such  rules  and  regulations  as  to  him  may 
seem  proper,  fi)r  it  obviously  partakes  of  the  nature  of  a  Theological  school. 
Far  be  it  from  me  to  impede  the  progress  of  religious  knowledge  ;  nothing  could 
be  more  dear  to  my  heart  than  to  encourage  whatever  contributes  effectually  to 
its  promotion  ;  but  placed  as  I  am,  as  a  sentinel  over  the*acred  ark  of  religion, 
it  is  my  imperative  duty  to  prevent  it  from  being  touched  by  profane  or  unprac- 
tised hands. 

So  far  from  viewing  this  society  in  the  light  you  see  it,  it  is  my  decided  con- 
viction that  it  ought  not  to  be  sanctioned  by  me  ;  how  can  it  be  supposed  that 
young  men,  whose  education  is  chiefly  mercantile  or  mechanical,  can  come  with 
sulRcient  preparation  to  the  discussion  of  a  question  that  requires  vast  erudition, 
with  a  degree  of  research,  which  they  cannot  posstss  ;  you  cannot  be  ignorant 
of  the  severe  mental  discipline  to  which  students  are  subjected  in  our  Theologi- 
cal Seminaries,  before  they  are  allowed  to  commence  the  study  of  theology. 
You  know  also  that  this  study  is  regulated  by  experienced  and  able  professors, 
that  young  men  are  not  allowed  to  grope  their  way  with  only  their  own  feeble 
light,  through  the  dark  mazes  of  deceitful  cavil,  and  infidel  sophistry. 

The  members  of  this  society  .  who  thirst  so  much  for  religious  knowledge,  can 
read  our  elementary  works,  anc  also,  the  masterly  productions  of  Milner,  Fletch- 
er, Bossuet's  history  of  the  Variations,  lately  prmted,  and  others,  where  they 
are  sure  to  find  the  tenets  of  our  faith  explained  with  a  precision  and  elegance 
that  cannot  fail  to  satisfy  the  sincere  inquirer  after  truth.  The  precision  of 
ideas,  and  elegance  of  expression  in  the  imparting  of  religious  knowledge,  their 
preamble  sets  forth  to  be  the  main  objects  of  this  society,  and  it  covers  the  desire 
and  intention  of  acquiring  that  species  of  tact  and  dexterity  in  theological  de- 
bate, which  would  enable  them  to  follow  into  the  arena  the  fanatics  of  the 
day.  All  this  I  must  condemn  as  well  as  a  publication  of  the  crude  essays  of 
tyros  among  us.     Let  us  dispute  less  and  practice  more. 

The  church  in  the  most  positive  manner  prohibits  all  laymen  from  entering 
into  dispute  on  points  of  religion  with  sectarians,  "  inhibemus,"'  says  Pope  Alex 
ander  IV.,  "  ne  unquam  Laicas  Personae  liceat  publice  vel  private  de  fide  Catholi 
ca  disputare  ;  qui  vere  contradicerit,  Excommunicationis  laqueo  innodetur."* 
Had  vou  recollected  this  sentence,  1  am  sure  you  would  be  far  from  calling  on 
the  Catholic  young  men  of  this  city  to  become  members  of  a  debating  society 
on  religious  subjects,  open  to  so  many  serious  objections. 

"  +  JoH:^,  Bishop  of  New- York." 

After  having  read  you  a  bishop's  bull  against  "  The  New  'York 
Catholic  society  for  the  promotion  of  religious  knowledge,"  I  will, 
while  on  this  subject,  read  you  also  a  bishop's  curse  against  a  refrac- 
tory priest  in  Philadelphia.  I  quote  it  from  one  of  the  News-papers 
of  that  day.  It  happened  some  twelve  or  fifteen  years  ago.  I  have 
several  such  cases  in  the  books  around  me  :  but  they  are  some  two  or 
three  centuries  old,  and  in  foreign  countries ;  and  therefore,  I  select  this 
modern  one  which  is  almost  a  copy  of  them,  because  a  little  acclimated. 

\^From  a  Fhiladelphia  Paper.']  We  have  at  length  obtained  a  correct  copy 
of  the  excommunication  of  William  Hogan,  Pastor  of  St.  Marj''8  Church,  of  this 
city.     It  is  as  follows: 

By  the  authority  of  God  Almighty,  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  and  the 
undefiled  Virgin  iVIarj-,  mother  and  patroness  of  our  Savior,  and  of  all  celes- 
tial virtues,  AngeU,  Archangels,  Thrones,  Dominions,  Powers,  Cherubiins  and 
Seraphims;  and  of  all  the  Holy  Patriarchs,  Prophets,  and  of  all  the  Apostles  and 
Evangelists  of  the  Holy  Innocents,  who,  in  the  sight  of  the  Holy  Lamb  are 
found  worthy  to  sing  the  new  song  of  the  Holy  Martyrs  and  Holy  Confessors, 
and  of  all  the  Holy  Virgins,  and  of  all  Saints,  together  with  the  floly  Elect  of 
God— may  he,  William  Hogan,  be  damned. 

We  excommunicate  and  anathematize  him,  and  from  the  threshold  of  the  Holy 
Church  of  God  Almighty,  we  sequester  him,  that  he  may  be  tormented,  disposed 

♦The  English  of  which  BuH  is  :—"  The  Church  prohibits  laymen,  either  publicly  or 
privately,  from  arguing  on  subjects  appertaining  to  the  Catholic  faith,  and  whosoever  shall 
violate  thii>  probibition.  let  him  be  bound  with  the  cord  of  Excommunication." 


R03IAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGION.  331 

•nd  be  delivered  over  with  Athan  and  Abirani,  and  with  those  who  say  unto  the 
Lord,  *  depart  from  us  for  we  desire  none  of  thy  ways;"  as  a  fire  is  quenched  with 
watei,  so  let  tile  li^ht  of  him  be  put  out  forevermore,  unless  it  shall  repent  him, 
and  mal(e  satisfaction.     Amen! 

May  the  Father,  who  created  man,  curse  him!  May  the  Son,  who  sufl'ered  for 
us,  curse  liini!  May  the  Pioly  Ghost,  who  suffered  for  us  in  baptism,  curse  him! 
May  the  Holy  Cross  which  Christ  for  our  salvation,  triumphing  over  his  enrinies. 
ascended,  curse  him! 

May  the  Holy  and  Eternal  Virgin  Mary,  mother  of  God,  curse  him !  May  St.  Mi- 
chael, the  Advocate  of  the  Holy  Souls,  curse  him,  May  all  the  angels,  prmcipali' 
ties,  and  powers,  and  all  heavenly  armies,  curse  him! 

Ma}'  the  praisewortliy  multitude  of  Patriarchs,  and  Prophets,  curse  him! 

May  St.  John  the  Precursor,  and  St.  John  the  Baptist,  and  St.  Peter,  and  St 
Paul,  and  St.  Andrew,  and  all  other  of  Christ's  Apostles  together,  curse  him!  and 
may  the  rest  of  our  Disciples  and  Evangelists,  who  by  their  preaching  converted 
the  universe,  and  the  holy  and  wonderful  company  of  Martyrs  and  Confessor, 
who  by  their  holy  works  are  found  pleasing  to  God  Almighty.  May  the  holy 
choir  of  the  Holy  Virgins,  who  for  the  honor  of  Christ  have  despised  the  things 
of  the  world,  damn  him!  May  all  the  saints  from  the  beginning  of  the  world 
to  everlasting  ages,  who  are  found  to  be  beloved  of  God,  danm  him! 

May  he  be  damned  wherever  he  be,  w|iether  in  the  house  or  in  the  stable,  the 
garden  or  the  field,  or  the  highways;  or  hvthe  woods,  or  in  the  waters,  or  in  the 
church;  may  he  be  cursed  in  living  and  in  dying! 

May  he  be  cursed  I'n  eating  and  in  drinking,  m  being  hungry,  in  being  thirsty, 
in  fasting,  in  sleeping,  ».  slumbering,  and  in  sitting,  in  livmg,  in  working,  m 
resting  and  blood  letting! 

May  he  be  cursed  in  all  the  faculties  oi'  his  body. 

May  he  be  cursed  inwardly  and  outwardly;  may  he  be  cursed  in  his  brains 
and  in  his  vertex,  in  his  temples,  in  his  eye-brows,  m  his  cheeks,  in  his  jaw  bones, 
in  his  nostrils,  inhis  teeth  and  grinders,  m  his  li['^  in  his  throat,  in  his  shoulders, 
in  his  arms,  in  )iis  fingers. 

May  he  be  damned  in  his  mouth,  in  his  breasts,  in  his  heart  and  purtenance, 
down  to  the  rery  stomach ! 

May  he  be  cursed  in  his  reins  and  in  his  groins;  in  his  thighs,  in  his  genitals 
and  in  his  hips,  and  his  knees,  his  legs  and  feet,  and  tot  nails! 

May  he  be  cursed  in  all  his  joints,  and  articulation  of  the  members;  from  the 
crown  of  his  head  to  the  sole  of  his  feet,  may  there  be  no  soundness. 

May  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  with  all  the  glory  of  his  majesty,  curse  him! 
And  may  heaven  with  all  the  powers  that  move  therein,  rise  up  against  him  and 
curse  and  damn  him;  unless  he  repent  and  make  satisfaction! 

Jimen.     So  be  it.     Be  it  so.     Amen. 

Ridiculous  as  this  may  appear — laughable  or  profane  ;  it  ia  never- 
^eless,  but  the  echo  of  one  of  the  one  hundred  anathemas  com- 
manded in  the  council  ot  Trent — one  of  the  greater  excommunications 
due  to  an  obstinate  heretic. 

As  still  more  indicative  of  the  present  views  and  feelings  of  the 
Roman  see,  on  the  subject  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  I  shall  give 
you  a  few  more  extracts.  I  had  laid  off  several  modern  documents 
of  much  point,  and  bearing  on  this  proposition ;  but  unfortunately, 
they  were  misplaced  in  my  library,  and  I  find  them  missing  .imong  the 
books  I  have  brought  with  me.  I  hold  in  my  hand,  however,  a  little 
work  in  which  I  find  some  of  them.  This  little  volume  containing 
"  Dr.  Beecher's  Plea  for  the  West,"  ought  to  be  in  every  idmily,  and 
read  by  every  adult  in  the  great  valley,  who  feels  any  interest  in  the 
preservation  of  our  free  and  happy  institutions.  I  wish  I  had  time  to 
read  much  of  it.  I  can  only  read  a  few  passages  of  the  documentary 
data  which  it  contains  : 

•  I  am  about  to  read  from  Gregory  XVI.  the  present  successor  of  Pe- 
ter, under  date  of  1832,  the  present  faith  of  Roman  Catholics  on  the 
subject  of  conscience,  and  liberty  of  the  press. 

"From  tliis  polluted  fountain  ^f  indifference.  Hows  that  absurd  and  erroneous 


S32  DEBATE    OX    THE 

doctrine,  or  rather  raving,  in  favor  and  defence  of'  libertj-  of  conscierxe,'  for 
which  most  pestilential  error,  the  course  is  opened  for  that  entire  and  wild  lib- 
erty of  opinion,  which  is  every  where  attempting  the  overthrow  of  religii>u«  and 
civil  institutions;  and  which  the  unblushing  impudence  of  some  has  held  forth 
as  an  advantage  to  religion.  Hence  that  pesi,  of  all  others  most  to  be  dreaded 
in  a  state,  unbridled  liberty  of  opinion,  licentiousness  of  sjjeech,  and  lust  of  no- 
velty, which,  according  to  the  experience  of  all  ages,  portend  the  downfall  of 
the  most  powerful  and  Hourishing  empires.  "  Hither  tends  that  worst  and  ne- 
ver sufficiently  to  be  execrated  and  detested  LIBERTY  OF  THE  PRESS  for  the  dif- 
fusion  of  all  manner  of  writings,  which  some  so  loudly  contend  for,  and  so  ao- 
tivelv  promote."    p.  121. 

'This  SO  fresh  from  Rome,  stamped  with  the  seal  of  infallibility, 
without  another  word,  sustains  that  specification  in  my  proposition 
relating  to  the  anti-American  spirit  and  genius  of  the  grand  elements 
of  popery. 

But  continues  he  on  the  subject  of  unlicensed  books  : 

"Ao  means  nmst  be  here  omitted,  says  Cif?Hen^  XIII.,  our  predecessor  of 
happy  memory,  in  the  Encyclical  Letter  on  the  proscription  of  bad  books — 'no 
tneoTis  must  be  here  omitted,'  as  the  extremity  of  the  case  calls  for  all  our  exer- 
tions, to  exterminate  the  Jalal  pest  which  spreads  through  so  many  works;  nor 
can  the  materials  of  error  be  otherwise  destroyed  than  by  the  Hames,  which  con- 
sume the  depraved  elements  of  the  evil." 

The  secretary  of  the  court  of  Vienna  and  counsellor  of  legation — 1 
mean  Frederick  Schlegel,  who,  in  1828,  lectured  on  the  philosophy 
of  history  in  favor  of  monarchy  and  popery — one  supreme  bishop,  and 
one  supreme  monarch — who  was  one  of  the  Austrian  cabinet,  fhe  con- 
fidential counsellor  of  Prince  Meiternich — whose  policy  and  opinions 
opened  the  way  for  Austrian  efforts  on  the  foundation  of  St.  Leopold, 
to  add  America  to  the  pope's  dominions — I  say,  of  this  great  man  and 
his  opinions,  the  author  of  a  foreign  conspiracy,  as  quoted  by  Doctor 
Beecher,  thus  speaks : 

"In  the  year  1828  the  celebrated  FVederick  Schlegel,  one  of  the  most  dis- 
tinguished literary  men  of  Europe,  delivered  lectures  at  V^ienna,  on  the  philoso- 
phy of  history,  (which  have  not  been  translated  into  English)  a  great  object  of 
which  is  to  show  the  mutual  support  which  popery  and  monarchy  derive  from 
each  other.  He  commends  the  two  systems  in  connexion  as  deserving  of  uni- 
versal reception.  He  attempts  to  prove  that  the  sciences,  and  arts,  and  all  the 
pursuits  of  man,  as  an  intellectual  being,  are  best  promoted  under  this  perfect 
system  of  church  and  state:  a  pope  at  the  head  of  the  former;  an  emperor  at  the 
head  of  the  latter.  He  contrasts  with  this,  the  system  of  Protestantism;  repre- 
sents Protestantism  as  the  enemy  of  good  government,  as  the  ally  of  republican- 
ism, as  the  parent  of  the  distresses  of  Europe,  as  the  cause  of  all  the  disorders 
with  which  legitimate  governments  are  afflicted.  In  the  close  of  lecture  17th, 
Vol.  II.  p.  286,  he  thus  speaks  of  this  country:  The  TRUE  NURSERY  of  all 
these  destructive  principles,  the  revolutionary  schoolfor  France  and  the  rest  of 
Europe,  has  been  JVbrth  America.  Thence  the  evil  has  spread  over  many  other 
lands,  either  by  natural  contagion,  or  by  arbitrary  communication.  lb.  p.  122, 
123. 

Such  are  the  popular  views  of  our  institutions  in  the  best  and  purest 
church  district  in  the  world  :  and  the  emigrants  of  that  country  with 
those  opinions  are  daily  crowding  to  our  shores,  and  filling  up  this 
immense  valley.  These  are  they  who  are  taught  to  execrate  the  lib- 
erty of  the  press,  and  to  consider  liberty  of  conscience  pestilential  er- 
ror, and  that  a  spiritual  monarch,  and  a  political  emperor  are  the  very 
paragon  of  all  excellence  in  church  and  state.  Is  this  compatible  with 
the  genius  of  our  institutions  ?  Are  not  such  views  and  reasonings, 
positively  subversive  of  them? 

Let  me  observe  from  that  book  of  Fessenden's  of  which  my  oppo- 
nent seemed  to  know  so  much  yesterday  :  but  the  author  of  whicii  he 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  333 

cannot  now  name,  as  1  believe,  (if  he  can,  however,  he  may  tell  us 
something  about  him) — I  say  from  the  Encyclopedia  of  Religious 
Knowledge,  and  from  some  other  documents  before  me,  I  would  wish 
to  read  a  few  statements,  to  show  that  this  said  Roman  Catholic  In- 
stitution, chameleon  like,  first  accommodates  itself  to  the  customs  of 
every  country,  and  seems  to  inhale  and  exhale  the  popular  atmosphere 
until  it  reaches  its  end  ;  (for  well  the  Jesuit  knows  the  means  may  be 
infinitely  various,  while  the  end  is  one'and  immutable,)  and  so  soon  as 
It  gains  the  fulcrum  of  popular  opinion  and  the  lever  of  the  majority, 
it  builds  up  an  empire,  after  the  model  of  the  Prince  Metternich.  This 
has  hitherto  been  its  history,  in  every  climate,  and  country,  and  age. 
A  single  example  of  this  policy,  taken  from  the  Encyclopedia,  must 
suffice : 

"  Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  bring  this  church  under  the  papal  yoke  ; 
but  without  success.  The  Portu<^uese  having  opened  a  passage  into  Abyssinia  in 
Ihe  fifteenth  century,  an  emissary  was  sent  to  extend  the  intiuence  and  authority. 
of  the  Roman  pontiff,  clothed  with  tlie  title  of  patriarch  of  the  Abyssinians.  The 
same  impoi°tant  commission  was  afterwards  given  to  several  Jesuits,  when  some 
circumstances  seemed  to  promise  them  a  successful  and  happy  ministry;  but  the 
Abyssinians  stood  so  firm  to  the  faith  of  their  ancestors,  that  towards  the  close  of 
the  sixteenth  century  the  Jesuits  had  lost  nearly  all  hope  in  that  quarter. 

About  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  Portuguese  fesuits  renew- 
ed the  mission  to  Abyssinia,  when  the  emperor  created  one  of  them  patriarch; 
and  not  only  swore  allegiance  to  the  Roman  pontiff,  but  also  obliged  his  subjects 
to  forsake  the  rites  and  tenets  of  their  ancestors,  and  to  embrace  the  doctrine  and 
worship  of  the  Romish  church.  At  length  the  emperor  became  so  exasperated 
at  the  arrogant  and  violent  proceedings  of  the  patriarch  in  subverting  the  es- 
tablished customs  of  the  empire,  for  the  purpose  of  confirming  the  pope's  au- 
tliority,  especially  in  imposing  celibacy  on  some,  and  requiring  divorce  oi  others, 
who  had  married  more  than  one  wife,  that  he  annulled  the  orders  formerly  given 
in  favor  of  popery,  banished  the  missionaries  out  of  his  dominions,  and  trea'ed 
with  the  utmost  severity  all  who  had  any  connexion  with  the  undertaking.  From 
this  period  the  very  name  of  Rome,  its  religion,  and  its  pontitf",  have  all  along 
been  objects  of  peculiar  aversion  among  the  Abyssinians." — Encyc.  Relig. 
Knowl.  p.  22. 

Thus  have  the  Jesuits  done  in  every  country,  and  this  will  they  do 
— first  ingratiate  themselves  with  the  people,  and  when  they  think 
they  are  secure  of  their  object,  they  will  proceed  to  subvert  the  gov- 
ernment :  for  they  are  sworn  and  sold  to  the  pope  forever. 

The  gentleman  says,  We  are  both  foreigners  ;  indicating  that  we 
have  equal  rights  and  privileges.  I  did  not  use  .that  terok  in  an  invi- 
dious sense,  when  speaking  of  my  willingness  to  receive  foreigners. 
Nor  do  I  oppose  the  prirrciples  of  my  opponent,  because  of  their  hos- 
tility to  Protestants  only  :  but  because  of  their  hostility  to  Roman 
Catholics.  It  is  from  my  views  of  the  political  and  religious  bear- 
ings, the  temporal  and  the  eternal  consequences  of  the  system,  that  I 
expose  and  oppose  it.  As  a  philanthropist,  I  am  cpposed  to  the  papal 
empire,  whether  at  home  or  abroad — in  Europe  or  America. 

But  although  politically  considered,  in  one  sense,  we  both  may  be 
called  foreigners  ;  yet,  we  are  not  foreigners  in  the  same  sense.  I 
claim  a  very  intimate  relation  with  the  Protestant  family.  I  am  one 
of  that  family.  It  was  then  my  family,  that  first  settled  this  country. 
The  bishop's  family  settled  Roman  Catholic  America!.  He  is  a  for- 
eigner here,  as  I  would  be  a  foreigner  in  Mexico  or  South  America.  I 
belong  to  the  persecuted — he  to  the  persecutors  of  that  family. 

In  the  next  place,  I  never  took  but  one  oath  of  allegiance.  I  never 
*owed  to  support  but  one  political  constitution.     My  opponent  first 


334  DEBATE    ON    THE 

swore  to  America  and  then  to  Rome.  He  is  bound  to  a  foreign  ]  rince 
1  am  not.     If  that  prince  should  reward  him  for  any  service  with  a 
Cardinal's  cap,  he  might  he  commanded  away  to  Rome  next  week. 

Bishop  Purcell.     No,  I  will  not  leave  this  country. 

Mr.  Campbell.  The  gentleman  is  under  the  "  Holy  Lord  the 
pope."     I  am  not  a  foreigner  in  this  sense. 

But  still  better,  I  am  the  father  of  a  family  :  my  children  are  nativft 
Americans  :  and  through  these  I  am  more  a  kin  to  the  great  Ameri- 
can family  than  he  ever  can  be.  Without  perjury  or  apostacy  from 
his  office,  he  can  never  have  a  wife,  nor  family.  He  is  a  strange»r  to 
those  near  and  holy  relations.  He  has  no  country — no  home.  H# 
lives  and  he  must  die  under  the  command  of  foreign  superiors ;  and 
they  may,  by  authority  or  promotion,  remove  him  to  Europe  or  Asia  at 
pleasure.  For  these  and  other  reasons  I  am  identified  with  Protestant 
America,  and  claim  a  relation  here  to  which  his  heart  shall  ever  be  a 
stranger — [Time  expired.] 

Half  past  10  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Bishop  Purcell  rises — 

Another  instance  of  the  unfairness  with  which  Catholic  principles 
are  represented  :  another  occasion  for  a  holy  triumph  ! 

That  Rhemish  Testament,  from  which  the  gentleman  has  just  now 
read,  was  never  sanctioned  by  the  Catholic  church.  It  was  published 
by  a  caucus  of  parsons  in  New  York,  (whose  names  are  prefixed  to  it,) 
for  the  express  purpose  of  vilifying  the  faith,  and  outraging  the  feel- 
ings of  Catholics!  And  this  is  called  a  Catholic  bible!  Good  God! 
whither  has  justice  fled  \  Archbishop  Murray,  of  Dublin,  has  lately, 
in  the  most  solemn  manner,  condemned  these  notes.  They  are  not  to 
be  found  in  the  Catholic  bible,  used  in  this  or  in  any  other  country.  I 
am  laboring  to  inspire  my  opponent  with  sentiments  of  self-respect; 
and  assure  him  anew,  that  "  tvil  communication  corrupts  good  man- 
ners." The  occasion  called  for  original  documents,  candid  statements, 
and  reputable  authorities  ;  but,  instead  of  these,  the  public  are  mocked 
by  my  friend  with  spurious,  garbled  extracts,  which  a  dignified  con- 
troversialist would  have  treated  with  contempt.  We  repudiate  the 
notes,  which  Protestants  iiave  appended, /or  us,  to  this  bible. 

Mr.  Campbell. — Produce  another. 

Bishop  Pubcell.-*— I  will.  Behold  it.  Here  is  the  bible  to  be 
found  in  every  book-store,  where  Catholic  works  are  for  sale.  Here 
is  Luke,  chap.  ix.  55  !  Not  a  word  of  it  there!  (Holds  it  opened 
towards  the  audience,  and  towards  Mr.  Campbell.) 

You  perceive,  that  I  have  granted  my  opponent,  all  the  extra  time 
he  chose  to  occupy,  to  explain  away,  if  he  could,  the  mis-lrans/atton 
(to  call  it  by  the  very  mildest  name)  of  Liguori ;  and  he  has  just  left 
it  where  he  found  it,  in  the  mire  of  infamy  !  The  edition  v.liich  I  ex 
hibit,  was  published  in  the  very  year  and  the  very  place  with  the  edi- 
tion, from  which  Mr.  Smith  pretends  to  have  quoted.  You  have 
heard  Mr.  Kinmont. 

The  gentleman  has  cited  the  words  of  Christ,  "  Do  this  in  commem 
oration  of  me,"  against  the  real  presence.  This  is  all  I  wanted,  to 
complete  my  argument.     Here  is  the  answer : 

"  Alter  haviug-proposed  the  sentiments  of  the  church  upon  these  words, " /Aw  M 
my  body,''wp  must  tell  what  she  thmks  of  these  others, which  Christ  added :  "rf« 
this  in  memory  of  me."    It  is  clear  that  the  intention  of  the  Son  of  God  is  to 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  335 

oblige  us  by  these  words  to  remember  the  death  which  he  suflfercd  for  our  saket; 
and  St.  Paul  concludes,  from  these  same  words,  that  we  announce,  in  this  myste- 
ry,  the  death  of  the  Lord.  But  it  must  not  be  imagined  that  this  remembrance 
of  his  death,  excludes  the  real  presence  of  his  body;  on  the  coutrarj-,  by  only 
considering  what  has  been  just  now  explained,  it  will  fully  appear  that  this  com* 
memoration  is  founded  upon  the  real  presence.  For  as  the  Jews,  in  eating  their 
peace  offerings,  remembered  that  they  had  been  sacrificed  for  them,  so  we,  in 
eating  the  flesh  of  Jesus  Christ,  our  victim,  should  remember  that  he  had  been 
immolated  for  us.  It  is  therefore  this  same  flesh  eaten  by  the  faithful,  which  not 
only  awakes  in  us  the  memory  of  his  immolation,  but  which  confirms  to  us  the 
truth  of  It.  And  far  from  being  able  to  say  that  this  solemn  commem  jration 
which  Jesus  Christ  orders  us  to  make,  excludes  the  presence  o(  the  fle»h,  it  is 
visible,  on  the  contrary,  that  this  tender  recollection,  which  he  wills  we  should 
have  of  him,  in  the  holy  conmiunion,  as  immolated  for  us,  is  founded  upon  the 
real  receivingof  this  sajue  flesh; it  being  surely  impossible  to  forget,  that  it  is  for 
us  he  hath  given  his  body  in  sacrifice,  when  we  see  that  he  gives  us  still  every 
day  this  victim  for  our  food." 

I  now  come  to  the  subject  of  purgatory,  which  my  friend  calls  the 
lever  of  the  pope,  to  raise  the  world.  1  should  be  glad  to  see  the 
pope  raise  the  world  in  any  way.  If  he  has  not  the  power  to  raise 
mortals  to  the  skies,  he,  at  least,  wants  the  will  to  pull  men  or  angels 
down.  The  doctrine  of  purgatory  can  be  proved  by  a  few  plain  texts. 
The  first  is  from  2d  Machabees,  xii.  42;  where  we  read,  that  the  val- 
iant Machabeus  sent  twelve  thousand  drachmas  of  silver  to  .Jerusalem, 
for  sacrifice,  to  be  offered  for  the  souls  of  the  dead.  "  It  is,  therefore, 
tays  the  scripture,  a  holy  and  a  wholesome  thought  to  pray  for.  the  dead, 
that  they  may  be  loosed  from  their  stns.^^ 

My  friend  will  say,  the  book  of  Machabees  is  not  canonical.  But, 
is  it  not,  as  Du  Pin  would  say,  very  ill  done  of  him,  to  reject  a  book 
of  scripture,  because  it  pinches  him.  This  is  a  fine  way  of  confuting 
Catholics :  to  mutilate  the  scripture  when  it  favors  our  doctrine  ;  to 
believe  our  enemies,  when  they  misrepresent  it;  and  to  attribute  to, 
and  force  upon  us,  doctrines  which  we  do  not  profess. 

The  books  of  the  Machabees  are  to  be  found  in  the  Codex  Alexan- 
drinus,  and  in  all  the  approved  bibles  of  the  Catholic  church,  from  the 
beginning.  Why  tear  them,  at  this  late  day,  from  the  canon  ?  Be- 
sides, they  are,  at  least,  authentic  history,  and,  as  such,  faithful  rec- 
ords of  the  belief  of  the  only  people  who,  at  the  time  when  they  were 
written,  professed  the  true  faith. 

Jesus  Christ  says,  that  there  is  a  blasphemy  against  the  Spirit; 
which  is  a  sin  that  will  not  be  forgiven,  neither  in  this  world,  nor  in 
that  which  is  to  come.  (Matt.  xii.  32.)  These  words  clearly  imply 
that  some  sins  will  he  forgiven  in  the  world  to  come.  Where  ?  Not 
in  heaven,  which  "  nothing  defiled  can  enter;"  not  in  hell,  for  out  of 
hell  there  is  no  redemption.  What  is  that  placs,  called  Abraham's 
bosom,  on  which  Lazarus  reposed,  until  heaven  was  opened  to  the 
souls  of  men,  by  the  death  of  Jesus  Christ  1  Was  it  heaven,  or  hell, 
or  that  intermediate  place  or  state,  which  Catholics  call  by  the  name 
of  purgatory  T  It  is  necessarily  the  latter  :  apart  from  the  suffering  of 
sense  by  purifying  fire,  it  would  be  a  state  of  mental  or  spiritual  suf- 
fering :  as  it  was  one  of  separation  from  God,  whose  beauty  the  soul, 
released  from  the  prison  of  the  body,  and  the  darkness  of  sin  and  ig- 
norance, so  clearly  discerns,  and  so  ardentiy  desires  to  enjoy.  The 
Savior  tells  us  to  be  reconciled  quickly  with  oti  adversary,  while  we 
are  in  the  way  :  lest  we  be  delivered  over  to  the  judge,  and  cast  into 
pris  'u,  whence  we  shall  not  be  released,  until  we  shall  have  paid  the 


336  DEBATE   ON    THK 

last  farthing.  (Matt.  v.  26.)  What  prison  is  this?  What  place  of 
sorrowful  detention  on  ike  way  to  heavenly  glory?  Neither  hearen. 
nor  the  abode  of  everlasting  torments;  conseq.uently,  purgatory. 

"  04m/  died  for  our  sins,"  says  St.  Peter,  (1st  Epist.  iii.  18,)  "be- 
ing put  to  death  in  the  Jltsh,  but  enlivened  in  the  spirit  .•  tn  which  also 
coming,  he  preached  to  those  spirits  that  were  in  prison."  This  is  the 
place,  of  which  it  is  said,  in  the  apostles'  creed,  '•'■  He  descended  into 
hell  "  which  was  surely  not  the  hell  of  the  damned,  but  that  tempo 
rary  hell,  or  hades,  or  purgatory,  to  whose  inmates  he  announced  the 
joyful  tidings  of  their  deliverance,  where  the  first  and  the  second 
Adam  met,  the  type  and  reality.  What  is  the  meaning  of  the  univer- 
sally prevalent  practice,  of  which  St.  Paul  speaks,  of  performing 
pious  works,  called  baptisms  for  the  oead :  "  Else  what  shall  they  dc 
who  are  baptized  for  the  dead,  if  the  dead  rise  not  at  all.  Why  are  they 
then  baptized  for  them?"     (1st  Cor.  xv.  29.) 

"  Hence,  the  council  of  Trent  teaches:  "That  there  is  a  purgatory,  and  tha 
the  souls  detained  tliere,  are  helped  by  the  prayers  of  the  faithful,  and  particu- 
larly by  the  acceptable  sacrifice  of  the  altar." 

St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  Eusebius,  St.  Epiphanius,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Jerome,  St, 
Augustine,  and  several  other  ancient  fathers  and  writers,  demonstrate,  that  the 
doctrine  of  the  church  was  always,  and  is  now  the  same,  as  that  which  was  de- 
fined by  the  council  of  Trent,  with  respect  both  to  prayers  for  the  dead,  and  an 
intermediate  state,  which  we  call  purgatory.  How  express  is  the  authority  of 
the  last  named  father,  where  he  says:  "through  the  prayers  and  sacrifices  otthe 
church  and  alms-deeds,  God  deals  more  mercifully  with  the  departed  than  their 
liins  deserve."     Serm.  172.  Enchirid.  cap.  109,  110. 

St.  Chrysostoin,  who  flourished  within  three  hundred  years  of  the  age  of  the 
apostles,  and  must  be  admitted  as  an  unexceptionable  witness  of  their  doctrine 
and  practice,  write?  as  follows:  "It  was  not  without  good  reason  ordained  by 
the  apostles,  that  mention  should  be  made  of  the  dead  in  the  tremendous  mjs- 
teries,  because  they  knew  well  that  these  would  receive  great  benefit  from  it." 
In  Cap.  1,  Philip.  Hocn.  3.  Tertullian,  who  lived  in  the  age  next  to  that  of  the 
apostles,  speaking  of  a  pious  widow,  says:  "  She  prays  for  the  soul  of  her  hus- 
band, and  begs  refreshment  for  him."  L.  De  Monogam.  c.  10.  St.  Cyprian, 
who  lived  in  the  following  age.  says:  "  It  is  one  thing  to  be  waiting  for  pardon; 
another  to  attain  to  glory:  one  thing  to  be  sent  to  prison,  not  to  go  from  thence 
till  the  last  farthing  is  paid;  another  to  receive  immediately  the  reward  of  faith 
and  virtue:  one  thing  to  suffer  lengthened  torments  for  sin,  and  to  be  chastised 
and  purified  for  a  long  time  in  that  fire;  another  to  have  cleansed  away  all  sin 
by  suffering."    S.  Cypr.  L.  4.  Ep.  2. 

The  doctrine  of  the  oriental  churches  agrees  with  that  of  the  Catholic  church, 
in  the  only  two  points  defined  by  her,  namely,  as  to  there  being  a  middle  state, 
which  we  call  purgatory,  and  as  to  the  souls.'detained  in  it,  being  helped  by  the 
prayers  of  the  livmg  faithful.  True  it  is,  they  do  not  generally  believe,  that 
these  souls  are  punished  by  a  material  fire;  but  neither  does  the  Catholic  church 
require  a  belief  of  this  opinion.  On  some  occasions,  Luther  admits  of  purgatory, 
s  an  article  founded  on  scripture.  Melancthon  confesses  that  the  ancients  pray- 
ed for  the  dead,  and  says  that  the  Lutherans  do  not  find  fault  with  it.  Calvin 
intimates,  that  the  souls  of  all  thejustare  detained  in  Abraham's  bosom  until  the 
day  of  judgment.  In  the  first  liturgv  of  the  church  of  England,  there  is  an  ex 
prtss prayer  for  the  departed,  that  "God  would  grant  them  mercy  and  everlast- 
ing peace."     Collier's  Eccl.  Hist.  Vol.  II.  p.  257. 

Bishops  .\ndrews.  Usher,  Montague,  Taylor,  Forbes.  Sheldon,  Barrow  of  S* 
Asaph's,  and  Blandford,  all  believed  that  the  dead  ought  to  be  prayed  for.  To 
these,  I  may  add,  the  religious  Dr.  Johnson,  whose  published  Meditations  prove, 
that  he  constantly  prayeu  for  his  deceased  wife." 

The  Universalists  make  hell  a  purgatory. 

The  notion,  that  this  doctrine  fills  the  pope's  coffers  with  gold,  is 
too  ridiculous  to  be  refuted!  Everj'  Catholic  knows  its  absurdity. 
.\s  to  the  intention  of  the  priest,  about  which  the  gentleman  has  found 


BOMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION  '     337 

80  much  to  say,  that  is  no  difficulty.  How  do  we  judge  of  the  ioten* 
tioii  ]  Simply,  by  the  act,  the  surest  evidence  of  its  existence.  Can 
we  ask  if  a  man  has  any  intention  to  eat  his  dinner,  when  we  see  him, 
sit  down  to  table,  take  his  knife  and  fork,  use  them,  and  eat  till  he  is 
filled ;  so  when  we  see  the  priest  does  what  every  priest  does,  and 
the  faithful  people  Jcnow  that  he  ought  to  do,  we  have  the  best  evi- 
dence of  his  intention.  Besides,  what  motive  could  he  have  for  such 
a  gratuitous  violation  of  the  law  of  God  and  profanation  of  a  sacra- 
ment. Nemo  repente  pessimus  is  an  old  and  a  true  maxim.  He  would 
fall  into  other  excesses,  first,  and  be  suspended — God  will  not  aban- 
don his  church ;  and  the  sincere  christian  will  always  be  rewarded  by 
him,  according  to  his  deserts.  No  man  goes  suddenly,  &c.  see  Secreta 
Monita,  It  was  placed  invidiously  among  the  rubbish  by  the  enemies 
of  the  Jesuits,  if  found  amid  the  ruins  of  their  house,  as  the  whole 
society  repudiated  it. 

Every  learned  and  sound  critic,  who  is  at  all  honorable,  denounces 
the  imposition — It  is  an  old  trick. 

Ovid  in  his  13th  book,  verse  59,  60,  suggests  the  idea,  in  speak- 
ing of  Ulysses'  treachery,  when  he  first  had  gold  hid  in  the  tent  of 
Palamedes  and  then  denounced  him  for  having  been  bribed  by  the 
enemies  of  Greece. 

"  Firtumque  probavit 
"  Criimn,  tt  ostendit  (]UO'l  jam  pr^'forlerat  aiiruin." 

Shall  I  invent  calumnies,  when  run  out  of  proof  of  any  man's  dishon- 
esty 1  God  forbid !  What  virtuous  and  immaculate  family  may  not  be 
thus  assailed  ?  And  the  more  virtuous  and  honorable  they  are,  the 
more  will  they  be  disconcerted  and  overwhelmed,  for  the  moment; 
but  the  more  complete  will  be  their  own  vindication  and  their  slander- 
ers' disgrace  in  the  end. 

The  gentleman  cannot  get  over  what  he  said  of  Washington  and 
our  Revolutionary  heroes,  "  the  fatal  shaft  is  sticking  in  his  side." 

God  has  given  to  the  people,  neither  too  much,  nor  too  little  power. 
He  has  given  them  no  spiritual  authority ;  for  as  Jesus  Christ  said  to 
his  apostles,  so  may  the  priest  say  to  his  flock :  "  You  have  not  cho- 
sen we."  "  No  one  durst  assume  the  office  of  priest,  but  he  that  is  call- 
ed to  it,  as  Aaron  was'"' — and  he  was  not  called  by  the  people.  In 
the  Catholic  church  we  solemnly  appeal  to  the  people  for  testimony 
for,  or  against,  a  candidate  for  holy  orders.  God  has  given  the  peo- 
ple reasonable  power,  in  temporal  matters,  and  revolutions  have  too 
often  shown  their  evils  and  calamities,  in  the  most  horrid  and  brutal 
excesses  and  the  loss  of  innumerable  lives.  This  is  an  awful  penalty 
for  the  rash  exercise  of  temporal  power  on  the  part  of  the  people.  Our 
own  revolution  was,  perhaps,  the  calmest,  the  most  temperate,  the 
least  abused  for  evil  purposes  by  wicked  man,  because  we  had 
Washington  and  kindred  spirits  to  direct  the  storm.  These,  my  wor- 
thy friend  calls  perjurers  !  As  God  has  restricted  the  people,  he  has 
also  restricted  their  rulers,  in  their  exercise  of  power.  How  many 
terrible  lessons  have  not  kings  been  taught,  for  its  abuse.  Why  can- 
not nations  unite  to  select  a  common  umpire ;  to  whom  all  disputes 
should  be  referred,  and  thus  the  crimes  of  kings,  and  revolution, 
with  all  its  accompanying  horrors,  by  the  people,  extinguished  in  the 
bud.  ' 

I  do  not  undertake  to  defend  the  popes  in  their  use  of  the  deposing 
power — and  were  my  voice,  at  this  moment,  ringing  in  the  Vatican, 
2  P  22 


S3S  DEBATE    ON    THE 

instead  of  the  Baptist  church,  Sycamore  street,  Cincinnait,  I  shooltj 
not  be  reproved.  There  are  in  the  religious,  as  well  as  in  the  spiri 
tual  world,  two  forces,  the  centripetal,  and  the  centrifugal.  The  see 
of  Rome  is  as  the  suii  and  centre  of  the  system,  to  which  all  the  pla- 
nets, revolving  in  beauteous  harmony,  tend.  We  bless,  we  \cf\e,  we  seek 
with  ardor,  by  a  kind  of  religious  instinct,  strong  as  the  law  s  of  gravita- 
tion, this  common  centre,  which  gives  us  all,  our  proper  impetus  and 
coherency.  But  like  the  planets,  we  are  not  absorbed  by  it.  We 
know  its  excellence,  its  usefulness,  its  destination,  its  limits* 

Now,  to  show  you  what  our  sentiments  are,  with  regard  to  tlie  tem- 

Soral  power  of  the  pope,  here  is  a  standard  work,  the  identical  text- 
ook  of  theology,  which  I  studied  in  Paris  many  years  ago.  The  au»- 
thor  is  still  living,  and  instead  of  being  rebuked  for  what  I  am  going 
to  say,  he  has,  on  the  contrary ,^  been  made  'bishop  of  Maus.,  in  France. 
His  name  is  Bouvier,  and  lie  is  as  pious  a  christian  as  he  is  a  sound 
divine.  I  read  you  evidence  from  scripture,  tradition  and  reason,  in 
favor  of  the  doctrine  which  is  the  bnxden  of  the  proposition,  viz.  that 
"  the  pope  has  no  right,  direct,  or  indirect,  by  any  divine  commission, 
to  the  temporalities  of  kings  or  other  Christians."  When  was  the 
deposing  power  first  claimed  by  the  popel  Ecclesiastical  history 
answers,  in  the  10th  century.  Then  by  the  rule  which  I  liave  alrea- 
dy laid  down,  it  is  no  part  of  Catholic  doctrine.  It  came  a  thousand 
years  too  late. 

'*  Proposition,  That  the  Roman  Pontiff  does  not  possess,  by  divine  right,  anj 
power,  either  disect  or  indirect^  over  the  temporalities  of  kings, or  other  chris- 
tians." This  proposition  is  proved  1st,  from  the  sacred  scripture:  "^»  the  Fh- 
ther  sent  me.  I  also  send  yoUr  (John  xx.  21.)  The  Son  of  man  hath  not  wher*. 
to  lay  his  head^  (Mat.  riii.  20.)  Who  hath  made  me  a  judge,  or  a  divider  over 
you?"  (Luke  xii.  14.)  Hence-  we  m«y  reason  thus.  The  sovereign  Pontiff  can 
have  no  authority  over  the  temporal  goods  of  men  by  divine  right,  unfess  it  be 
granted  to  him  by  Christ,  but  he  has  received  no  such  power  from  Christ,  for 
Christ  gave  to  no  man  a  power,  which,  he  hinTseif,  when  on  earth,  did  not  pos- 
sess; but  Christ  when  on  earth  piossessed  no  such  power,  relating  to  temporal  mat- 
ters, as  appears  both  from  his  poverty,  and  froni  these  words  of  his,  "who  hath 
made  me  a  judge  or  a  divider  over  you."  Therefore  the  Roman  PoBtiff  does  not 
possess,  by  divine  authoritv,  any  power,  &c. 

Besides,  Christ  expressly  declared  that  he  was  a  king,  but  at  the  same  time,  he 
positively  denied  that  his  kingdom  was  of  this  world,  (John  xviii.  36.)  For  this 
purpose  l  came  into  the  world,  he  says y  that  I  might  bear  testimony  to  the  Iruthi 
in  another  place  he  ordered  to  give  to  Cmsar  the  things  that  belong  to  Cmsar, 
(Mat.  xxii.  21.)  By  a  miracle,  he  caused  the  stater  to  be  foand  in  the  mouth  of  8 
fish,  that  the  tribute  might  be  paid  for  hiraseM"  and  Peter,  (Matt.  xvii.  27;)  ancJ 
surely  he  could  not  shew,  in  taore  express  terms,  that  he  did  not  Trish  to  exer- 
cise any  temparal  authority.  Furthermore,  when  he  sent  his  apostles,  he  by  no- 
means,  spoke  to  them,  concerning  temporal  affairs,  or  anj'  political  authority, 
but  only  of  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and  the  power  of  binding  and 
loosing;  be  orrferea  that,  going  through  the  entire  worrrf,  they  would  teach 
these  things  which  he  commanded  them;  he  announced  to  them  many  tribida 
iions  of  every  sort,  and  even  death;  he  commanded  them,  to  advise  and  reprove 
those  who  transgress,  but  that  they  should  not  punish  them,,  unless  by  spiriluat 
pains:  If  he  will  not  hear  the  church,  says  he,  let  him  be  to  thee,  as  the  heathen 
and  the  publican,  (Matt,  xviii,  17.):  he  that  helieveih  not,  shall  be  condemned, 
(Mark  xri.  16.)  The  apostles,  in  like  manner,  far  from  exercising  any  tempo- 
ral power,  on  the  contrary,  strongly  recommemled  obedience  and  respect  to  al) 
Pagan  princes  and  persecutors,  and  rulers  sent  hy  them. 

It  can  be  proved,  2nd.  from  tradition.  We  wouki  be  tedious,  were  we  to  re- 
hearse all  the  testimonies  of  Fathers,  Doctors  and  chief  bishops,  who  by  theii 
word  and  example  clearly  taught,  that  the  civil  power  was  entirely  indepe» 
dent  of  the  ecclesiastical. 

Tei^ullian  in  his  Apologetic,  chap.  30,  say»:  "  They,  (the  christia»is,^  koow 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  339 

who  hath  given  power  to  sinperors they  know  that  it   was  God,  alone,  io 

whose,  power  they  are,  to  whom,  they  are  second,  and  after  whom  they  are  first 
.......an  emperor  has  his  authority,  from   him  by   whom  he  was  created  man. 

Detore  bt- ir.g  emperor.  He  receives  power  from  him,  from  whoni  also  he  receiv- 
ed the  breuth  of  life IVe  pray  for  all  emperors."     All  christians,  imbued  with 

this  doctrine,  opposed  the  arms  of  patience  alone,  to  the  most  unjust  and 
most  cruel  tortures,  for  more  than  three  hundred  years. 

Osius,  bishop  of  Cordova,  writes  thus  to  the  emperor  Constantius,  who  favor- 
ed the  Arians.  "  Do  you  not  interfere  with  ecclesiastical  matters,"  as  already 
quoted. 

Pope  Ge.asius,  in  his  epistle  8th  to  Anastasius,  a  violent  enemy  of  Catholics, 
says,  'There  are  two  things,  O  emperor  Augustus,  by  which  principally,  thi« 
world  is  governed,  the  sacred  authority  of  the  popes,  and  the  authority  of  kings. 
(La'^be  torn.  4.  page  1122.)  This  popKB,  therefore,  considered  that  each  power 
was  mdependent  of  the  other. 

It  can  be  proved,  3d.  By  theological  reasoning.  1.  That  opinion  ought  to  be 
rejected,  which  was  entirely  unheard  of  during  the  ten  first  as;es;  but  that  opin- 
ion which  holds  that  the  ciiief  bishop  has  anj  jusLright  even  indirect,  over  the 
temporal  possessions  of  princes,  or  other  christians,  was,  by  no  means,  heard  of 
during  the  ten  first  ages,  to  wit,  down  to  the  time  of  Gregory  VII.  who  in  the  year 
1080,  attempted  to  depose  Henry  IV.  and  disturbed  the  peace  of  the  entire  world, 
by  the  assertion  of  this  novel  right.  Therefore  that  opinion  should  be  rejected,  &c. 

2.  That  opinion  sliould  be  entirely  rejected  which  would  occasion  most 
grievous  evils,  but  the  opinion  which  we  oppose,  gives,  &c.  1.  It  renders  harmo- 
ny between  the  priesthood,  and  the  sovereign  power,  impossible.  2.  It  would 
prevent  infidel  princes  from  embracing  the  christian  religion,  and  heretics  from 
returning  to  the  true  church.  3.  It  would  aflbrd  a  necessary  occasion  for  con- 
tinual wars,  if  it  were  practised,  which,  experience  has  already  tooclearly  shewn. 
Therefore,  it  should  be  entirely  rejected,  fcc.  fee.  &c. 

Now  see  here  the  scholastic  method  of  proving  propositions,  and 
an  admirable  one  it  is.  We  say  1st,  scripture  teaches  it, — 2nd,  anti- 
quity corroborates  it, — 3d,  reason  confirms  it.  That  is  the  method 
we  follow,  in  all  our  schools.  This  is  the  solid,  and  irrefutable  man- 
ner in  which  this  proposition  is  laid  down  and  established.  Does  this 
look  like  submitting  to  the  dictation  of  the  pope  in  temporal  matters? 
Did  the  English  Catholics  obey  the  pretended  absolution  bull  ?  Did 
not  Catholics  under  arms,  and  with  arms,  as  in  the  case  of  Julius  II, 
resist  their  acknowledged,  and  in  his  proper  sphere,  respected  Pon 
tiff?     Did  they  not  tie  his  hands  while  they  kissed  his  feet? 

Waddington  tells  us  that  when  Louis  XII.  of  France  quarreled 
with  the  pope,  he  called  a  council  of  bishops  at  Tours,  and  proposed 
the  question,  whether  he  could  detain  the  pope,  as  his  prisoner,  on  an 
occiasion,  which  he  described.  They  gave  an  allirmative  answer 
This,  in  addition  to  what  I  have  said,  shows  how  the  distinction  of 
power,  and  of  rights,  was  understood  at  that  period,  and  every  epoch, 
back  to  the  apostolic  ages. 

My  friend  asks  for  a  disclaimer  of  these  pretensions,  on  the  part 
of  the  pope. 

Mr.  Campbell. — Not  by  the  pope,  but  by  t^e  councils. 

Bishop  Purcell. — The  general  councils  never  made  the  recogni 
tion  of  this  power,  an  article  of  faith ;  why,  then,  should  they  dis- 
claim iti 

Here  is  what  pope  Innocent  III.  said.  His  account  of  this  afTajr 
is  very  curious.  It  is,  indeed,  a  strong  disclaimer,  and  every  word 
deserves  to  be  matuiely  weighed. 

Cum  rex  superiorem  in  temporalibus  niinime  recognoscat,  sine  juris  alterius 
lysione  in  eo  se  jurisdictioni  nostra?  subjicere  potuit,  in  quo  vjderttur  aliquibus, 

3uod  perseipsum,  non  tanquam  pater  cum  filiis,  sed  tanquam  princep  rum  sub- 
itis  potuit  aispen*»'e.     Regi  igitur  gratiain  fecimus  requisiti: — cjuod  non  toluui 


340 


DEBATE    ON    THE 


in  EcclMlJC  patrimonio,  super  quo  plenam  in  teniporal'bus  gerimus  poteslatern. 
veruin  etiam  in  aliis  regionibus,  certis  causisinspectis,  teniporalem  junsuictionem 
casualiter  exetv.enias.  JVon  quodalieno  juri  pragudicare  velinius,  vel  potestateiu 
nobis  indebitam  usurpare,  cum  non  ignoramus  Christum  io  evangtiio  respond i«ge; 
redite,  quae  sunt  Ca:sari.s,  Ciesari,  et  qu;t  sunt  Dei,  Deo.  Propter  quoci  postula- 
tus  ut  hatred itatem  divideret  inter  duos  :  quis,  inquit,  constituit  mejudicem  inter 
vos?  Sed  quia  in  Deuteronomio  contineter,  si  diflicile  et  ambiguum  apud  te 
judicium  esse  perspexeris,  "Surge  et  ascende  ad  locum,  quern  eligit  Dominus 
X)eus  tuus,  &c.     Liber  V.  Epistl2.  Innocent  III. 

Since  the  King  by  no  means  recognizes  a  superior  in  temporal  authority,  he 
could  submit  to  our  jurisdiction  without  infringmg  upon  the  right  of  another, 
in  which  it  seems  to  some,  that  he  could  dispense,  not  as  a  father  with  his  children 
L>utasa  prince  with  his  subjects  ;  therefore  we  granted  the  Kmg  what  was  re* 
quisite,  because  we  not  ouTv  exercise  a  temporal  power,  tn  certain  cases,  in  the 
patrimony  of  the  church,  over  which  we  act  with  lull  authority  in  temporalities, 
but  also  in  other  districts,  certain  matters  being  considered  on  :  JVot  that  we 
wish  to  determine  prematurely  of  another's  right,  or  usurp  a  power  not  due  to 
us  :  since  we  are  not  ignorant  of  what  Christ  has  said  in  the  gospel.  On  account 
of  which  he  was  asked  to  divide  an  inheritance  between  two,  who,  savs  he,  has 
appointed  me  judge  between  ye  ?  But  that  it  is  written  in  Deuteronomy,  if' 
you  find  a  difficult  and  doubtful  case,  rise  and  repair  to  the  place,  which  the 
Lord  your  God  has  chosen,  &c.  B.  V,  E.  12.  Innocent  III. 

Here  Ihe  pope,  himself,  quotes  scripture  and  precedent,  against 
the  assumption  of  such  power.  Next — behold  the  testimony  of  a 
particular  council,  the  doctrine  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  of  an  eminent 
divine,  the  celebrated  Arthur  O'Leary,  on  the  matter  before  us,  and 
on  persecution  for  conscience  sake. 

The  Council  of  Toledo  forbids  the  use  of  violence  to  enforce  belief:  "Because," 
add  the  fathers,  "  God  shows  mercy  to  whom  bethinks  fit  ;  and  hardens  whom 
he  pleases."  "  Pnrcipit  sancta  synodus  nemini  deinceps  ad  credendura  lim  in- 
ferre.  Cui  enim  Deus  vult,  miseretur  ;  et  quern  vult,  indurat."*  And  the 
council  of  Lateran,  under  Pope  Alexander  the  third,  acknowledges,  that  the 
church  rfjects  bloody  executions  on  the  score  of  religion,  which  proves  to  dem- 
ODStration,  that  the  canon  charged  to  the  fourth  council  of  Lateran,  under  Inno- 
cent the  third,  in  which  canon,  "  the  secular  powers  are  addressed  to  take  an 
oath,  to  exterminate  all  heretics  out  of  their  territories,  and  in  case  of  refusal,  to 
have  their  subject's  absolved  from  their  allegiance,  and  the  lands  of  the  heretics 
to  be  seized  by  the  Catholics,"  &c. is  spurious.  Collyer,  the  Protestant  his- 
torian, in  his  fifth  volume  of  Ecclesiastical  History,  acknowledges  that  it  is  not 
found  in  any  copy,  coeval  with  the  council.  Some  hundred  vears  after  the 
council,  it  was  produced  to  light  by  a  German.  And  we  know  fu"ll  well,  thatat 
that  time,  several  spurious  pieces  were  produced,  to  serve  the  purposes  of 
rancor. 

Were  even  such  a  decree,  or  any  other  of  a  similar  nature,  genuine,  theCath. 
olicsr^would  reject  them,  without  any  breach  of  faith  ;  because  the  church  has 
no  power  over  life,  limb,  the  rights  of  sovereigns,  the  property  of  individuals, 
or  any  temporal  concern  whatsoever.  Her  bishops,  then,  whether  separately, 
or  in  a  collective  body,  cannot  graft  any  such  power  into  their  spiritual  commis- 
sion. They  would  act  in  an  extrajudicial  manner,  and  beyond  the  limits  of  their 
sphere.    This  I  have  proved  in  my  remarks  on  Mr.  Wesley's  letter,  and  elsewhere. 

Far  from  countenancing  cruelty,  death  and  oppression,  "  the  spirit  of  the 
church  was,  in  such  a  manner,  the  spirit  of  meekness  and  charity,  that  she  pre- 
Tentcd,  a,s  much  as  in  her  power,  the  death,  of  criminals,  and  even  of  her  most 
cruel  enemies,"  says  Fleury.  "  You  have  seen  how  the  lives  of  the  murderers 
of  the  martyrs  of  Armenia  were  saved  ;  and  St.  Austin's  effort  to  preserve  the 
Donatists,  (who  had  exercised  such  cruelties  against  the  Catholics)  from  the 
rigor  of  the  imperial  laws.  You  have  seen  how  much  the  church  detested  the 
indiscreet  zeal  of  those  bishops,  who  prosecuted  the  beresiarch  Priscillian  to 
death. 

In  general,  the  church  saved  the  lives  of  all  criminals,  as  far  as  she  had  power. 
St.  Augustine  accounts  for  this  conduct,  in  his  letter  to  Macedonius,  where  w« 

*  Cap  de  Judxis,  dist.  45. 


R05IAN    CATHOLIC    KELIGION.  341 

read  that  the  church  wished  there  were  no  pains  in  this  life,  but  of  the  healing 
kind,  to  deslroy,  not  man,  but  sin,  and  to  preserve  the  sinner  from  eternal  tor 
ments."*  If,  in  after  ages,  some  popes  and  bishops  deviated  from  this  plan  of 
meekness  and  moderation,  their  conduct  should  not  involve  a  consequence  inju- 
rious to  the  principles  of  the  Catholic  church,  which  condemns  such  proceeding. 
The  religion  of  Catholics  and  Protestants  condemns  frauds,  fornications,  drunk- 
ennRM,  revenge,  duelling,  perjury,  &c.  Some  of  their  relaxed  and  impious 
writers  hare  even  attempted,  not  onl^  to  palliate,  but  even  to  apologize  for  such 
disorders.  The  children  of  the  christian  religion  daily  practise  them, — is  the 
christian  religion  accountable  for  the  breach  of  her  own  laws'? 

My  friend  made  some  display,  on  the  persecuting  canon  of  the  coun- 
cil of  Lateran,  and  yet  Collyer,  a  Protestant  historian,  in  the  5th  vo- 
lume of  his  ecclesiastical  history,  pronounces  it  spurious  !  He  ac- 
knowledges that  it  is  not  found  in  the  copy  of  the  decrees  coeval  with 
the  council ;  that  it  was  manufactured  by  the  Germans,  hundred*,  of 
years  afterwards ;  and  that  there  were  several  spurious  documents 
manufactured  about  the  same  time.  Now  hear  a  distinguished  pre- 
late of  our  church,  Dr.  England,  in  his  speech  before  congress,  in 
which  he  leaves  nothing  important  unsaid  on  this  topic.  I  am  happy 
to  incorporate  his  eloquent  remarks  in  this  debate. 

"  A  political  difficulty  has  been  sometimes  raised  here,  [f  this  infallible  tribu- 
nal which  you  profess  yourselves  bound  to  obey,  should  command  you  to  over- 
turn our  government,  and  tell  you  that  it  is  the  will  of  God  to  have  it  new  model- 
ed, will  you  be  bound  to  obey?  And  how  then  can  we  consider  those  men  to 
be  good  citizens,  who  profess  to  owe  obedience  to  a  foreign  authority,  to  an  au- 
thority not  recognized  in  our  constitution ;  to  an  authority  which  has  excommu- 
nicated and  deposed  sovereigns,  and  which  has  absolved  subjects  and  citizens 
from  their  bond  of  allegiance. 

Our  answer  to  this  is  extremely  simple  and  very  plain,  it  is,  that  we  would  not 
be  bound  to  obey  it;  that  we  recognize  no  such  authority.  I  would  not  allow 
to  the  pope  or  to  any  bishop  of  our  church,  outside  this  Union,  the  smallest  in- 
terference with  the  humblest  vote  at  our  most  insignificant  balloting  box.  He 
has  no  right  to  such  interference.  You  must,  from  the  view  which  I  have  taken, 
see  the  plain  distinction  between  spiritual  authority,  and  a  right  to  interfere  in 
the  regulation  of  human  government  or  civil  concerns.  You  have  in  your  con- 
stitution wiselj-  kept  them  distinct  and  separate.  It  will  be  wisdom  and  prudence 
and  safety  to  continue  the  separation.  Your  constitution  says  that  Congress  shall 
have  no  power  to  restrict  the  free  exercise  of  religion.  Suppose  your  digni 
fied  body  to-morrow  attempted  to  restrict  me  in  the  exercise  of  that  right;  though 
the  law,  as  it  would  be  called,  should  pass  your  two  houses  and  obtain  the  signa- 
ture of  the  president,  I  would  not  obey  it,  because  it  would  be  no  law.  it  would 
be  an  usurpation:  for  you  cannot  make  a  law  in  violation  of  your  constitution; 
you  have  no  power  in  such  a  case.  So,  if  that  tribunal  which  is  established  by 
the  Creator  to  testify  to  me  what  he  has  revealed,  and  to  make  the  necessary 
regulations  of  discipline  for  the  government  of  the  church,  shall  presume  to  go 
beyond  that  boundary  which  circumscribes  its  power,  its  acts  are  invalid,  my 
rights  are  not  to  be  destroyed  by  its  usurpation,  and  there  is  no  principle  of  my 
creed  which  prevents  my  usingmy  natural  right  of  proper  resistance  to  any  tyran- 
nical usurpation.  You  have  no  power  to  interfere  with  my  religious  rights,  the 
tribunal  of  the  church  has  no  power  to  interfere  with  my  civil  rights.  It  is  a 
duty  which  every  good  man  ought  to  discharge  for  his  own,  and  for  the  public 
benefit,  to  resist  any  encroachment  upon  either.  We  do  not  believe  that  God 
gave  to  the  church  any  power  to  interfere  with  our  civil  rights  or  ourcivil  concerns. 
Christ  our  Lord  refused  to  interfere  in  the  division  of  the  inheritance  between  two 
brothers,  oge  of  whom  requested  that  interference.  The  civil  tribunals  of  Judea 
were  vested  with  sufficient  authority  for  that  purpose,  and  he  did  not  transfer  it 
to  his  apostles.  It  must  hence  be  apjiarent  that  any  idea  of  the  Roman  Catholics  of 
those  republics  being  in  any  way  under  the  influence  of  any  foreign  ecclesiastical 
power,  or  indeed  of  any  church  authority  in  the  exercise  of  their  civil  rights,  ii 
a  serious  mistake.    There  is  no  class  of  our  fellow  citizens  more  free  to  think,  . 


*  Fleury,  Oiscoura,  3.  No  9. 
2o3 


342  DEBATE    ON    THE 

and  to  act  for  themselves  on  the  subject  of  our  rights  than  we  are,  and  I  believa 
there  is  not  any  portion  of  the  American  family  more  jealous  of  foreign  influence 
or  more  ready  to  resist  it.  We  have  brethren  of  our  church  in  every  part  of  the 
globe,  under  every  form  of  government.  This  is  a  subject  upon  which  each  of  us 
isfree  to  act  as  he  thinks  proper.  We  know  of  no  tribunal  in  our  church  which 
can  interfere  in  our  proceedings  as  citizens.  Our  ecclesiastical  autliority  existed 
before  our  constitution,  is  not  afl'ected,  by  it;  there  is  not  in  the  world  a  consti- 
tution which  it  does  not  precede,  with  which  it  could  not  co-exist;  it  has  seen 
nations  perish,  djnasties  decay,  empires  prostrate;  it  has  co-existed  with  all|  it 
has  survived  them  all,  it  is  not  dependent  upon  any  one  of  them;  they  may  still 
change,  and  it  will  still  continue.  ' 

We  now  come  to  examine  what  are  called  the  persecuting  laws  of  our  church 
In  the  year  1215,  at  the  council  of  Lateran,  certain  heresies  were  condemned 
by  the  first  canon;  and  amongst  other  things  this  canon  recites  as  Catholic  faith 
in  opposition  to  the  errors  of  those  whom  it  condemned,  that  there  was  but  one 
God  the  Creator  of  all  things,  of  spirits  as  well  as  bodies;  the  author  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  equally  as  of  the  New  Testamen* 
and  of  the  Christian  dispensation;  that  he  created  not  only  the  good  angels 
but  also  the  devil  and  the  bad  angels,  originally  coming  good  from  his  hand,  and 
becoming  wicked  by  their  own  malice,  &c.  In  its  third  canon  it  excommunicates 
those  heretics,  and  declares  them  to  be  separated  from  the  body  of  the  church 
Then  follows  a  direction,  that  the  heretics  so  condemned,  are  to  be  given  up  to 
the  secular  powers,  or  to  their  bailifis,  to  be  duly  punished.  This  direction  con 
tinues  to  require  of  all  bishops  and  others  having  authority,  to  make  due  search 
within  their  several  districts  for  those  heretics,  and  if  they  will  not  be  induced 
to  retract  their  errors,  desires  that  they  should  be  delivered  over  to  be  punished. 
There  is  an  injunction  then  to  all  temporal  lords  to  cleanse  their  dominions  by 
exterminating  those  heretics:  and  if  they  will  not,  within  a  year  from  having 
been  so  admonished  by  the  church,  cleanse  their  lands  of  this  heretical  Jilth 
they  shall  be  deprived  if  they  have  superior  lords,  and  if  they  be  superior  lords 
and  be  negligent,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  metropolitan  and  his  provincial 
bishops  to  excommunicate  them,  and  if  any  one  of  those  lords  paramount  so  ex- 
communicated for  this  negligence  shall  continue  during  twelve  months  under  th« 
excommunication,  the  metropolitan  shall  certify  the  same  to  the  pope,  who,  find- 
ing admonition  useless,  shall  depose  this  prince,  and  absolve  his  subjects  from 
their  oaths  of  fealty,  and  deliver  the  territory  over  to  Catholics,  who  naving  ex- 
terminated the  heretics  shall  remain  in  peaceable  possession. 

This  is  the  most  formidable  evidence  adduced  against  the  position  which  I 
have  laid  down,  that  it  is  not  a  doctrine  of  our  church,  that  we  are  bound  to 
persecute  those  who  differ  from  us  in  belief.  I  trust  that  I  shall  not  occupy 
very  much  of  your  time  in  showing,  that  this  enactment  does  not  in  any  way 
weaken  that  assertion.  1  shall  do  so,  by  satisfying  you  that  this  is  a  special  law 
for  a  particular  case ;  and  also  by  convincing  you  that  it  is  not  a  canon  of  thexhurch 
respecting  any  of  those  points  in  which  we  admit  her  infallibility;  nor  is  it  a 
canon  of  the  church. 

The  doctrines  condemned  in  this  first  canon  originated  in  Syria, touched  lightly 
at  the  islands  of  the  Archipelago,  settled  down  in  Bulgaria,  and  spread  into  the 
'south  of  Europe,  but  were  principally  received  in  the  vicinity  of  Albi,  in  France. 
The  persons  condemned  held  the  Manichean  principle  of  there  being  two  crea- 
tors of  the  universe;  one  a  good  being,  the  author  of  the  New  Testament,  the 
creator  of  good  angels,  and  generally  of  spiritual  essence;  the  other  an  evil  be- 
ing, the  creator  of  bodies,  the  author  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  and  generally 
of  the  Old  Testament.  They  stated  that  marriage  was  unlawful,  and  co-opera- 
tion with  the  principle  of  evil  was  criminal.  The  consequences  to  society  were 
of  the  very  worst  description,  immoral,  dismal,  and  desolating.  The  church 
examined  the  doctrine,  condemned  it  as  heretical,  and  cut  off  those  who  held  or 
abetted  it,  from  her  conmiunion.  Here,  according  to  the  principles  which  I  have 
maintained  before  you,  her  power  ended.  Beyond  this  we  claim  no  authority: 
the  church,  by  divfne  right,  we  say,  infallibly  testifies  what  doctrines  Christ  has 
revealed,  and  by  the  same  right,  in  the  same  manner,  decides  that  what  contra- 
dicts this  revelation  is  erroneous:  but  she  has  no  divine  authority  to  make  a  law 
which  shall  strip  of  their  property,  or  consign  to  the  executioner,  those  whom 
she  convicts  of  error.  The  doctrine  of  our  obligation  to  submit  does  not  extend 
to  force  us  to  submit  to  an  usurpation;  and  if  the  church  made  a  law  upon  9 


RO«AM    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  343 

subject  beyond  her  coitimissiun  for  legislation  it  would  be  invalid  there  would 
be  no  proper  claim  for  our  obedience:  usurpation  does  not  create  a  right.  The 
council  could  by  right  make  the  doctrinal  decision ;  but  it  had  no  right  to  make 
the  temporal  enactment:  and  where  there  exists  no  right  to  legislate  on  one 
side,  there  is  no  obligation  ot'  obedience  on  the  other.  If  this  was  then  a  canon 
of  the  church,  it  was  not  one  in  making  which  she  was  acting  within  her  consti- 
tutional Juris:liction,  it  was  an  usurpation  of  temporal  government,  and  the  doc 
trine  of  infallibility  does  not  bear  upon  iL 

Every  document  respecting  this  council,  the  entire  of  the  evidence  respecting 
it,  as  well  as  the  verv  mode  of  framing  the  enactments,  prove  that  it  was  a  special 
law  regarding  a  particular  case.  The  only  persons  whose  errors  were  con- 
demned at  that  council  were  those  whom  I  have  described.  The  general  prin- 
ciple of  legal  exposition  restraining  tlie  application  of  penal  enactments  must 
here  have  full  weight,  and  will  restrain  the  application  of  the  penalty  to  the 
only  criminals  brought  within  its  view.  But  the  evidence  is  still  more  confirmed, 
by  the  special  words  of  delinite  meaning,  this,  and  filth,  which  were  specially 
descriptive  oi  only  those  persons;  the  first  by  its  very  nature,  the  second  by  the 
nature  of  their  crime;  and  the  continued  exposition  of  the  enactment  restrained 
its  application  to  the  special  case,  though  frequently  attempts  had  been  made 
by  individuals  to  extend  its  a|)plication,  not  in  virtue  of  the  statute,  but  in  vii-tue 
of  analogy.  It  would  then  be  improperly  forcing  its  construction  to  say  that  its 
operation  was  to  be  general,  as  it  evidently  was  made  only  for  a  particular  case. 

In  viewing  the  preamble  to  this  council,  as  well  as  fi-om  our  knowledge  of 
history,  we  discover  that  this  was  not  merely  a  council  of  the  church,  but  it  was 
also  a  congress  of  the  civilteed  world.  The  state  of  the  times  rendered  such 
assemblages  not  only  usual  but  neces-sary:  and  each  legislative  body  did  its  own 
business  by  its  own  authority ;  and  very  generally  the  subjects  which  were  de- 
cided upon  by  one  body  in  one  point  of  view,  came  under  the  consideration  of 
the  other  assembly  in  a  ditfefent  point  of  view,  and  their  separate  decisions  were 
engrossed  upon  a  joint  record. 

Sometimes  they  were  preserved  distinct  and  separate,  but  copyist?,  for  their 
own  convenience,  brougnt  together  all  the  articles  i-egarding  tiie  same  subject, 
from  what  source  soever  they  were  obtained.  Such  was  precisely  the  case  in 
the  instance  before  us.  There  were  present  on  this  occasion,  by  themselves  or 
by  their  legates,  the  king  of  Sicily,  emperor  elect  of  the  Romans,  the  emperor  of 
the  east,  the  king  of  France,  the  king  of  England,  the  king  of  Arragon,  the  king 
of  Jerusalem,  the  king  of  Cyprus,  several  other  kings,  and  lords  paramount,  so- 
vereign states,  and  pnnces.  Several  of  the  bishops  were  princes  or  barons.  In 
the  ecclesiastical  council,  the  third  canon  terminated  exactly  in  one  sentence, 
which  was  that  of  the  excommunication  or  separation  from  the  church,  of  those 
whom  the  first  canon  had  condemned,  whatever  name  or  names  they  might  as- 
sume; because  they  had  in  several  places  several  appellations,  and  were  con- 
tinually dividing  otf  and  changing  names  as  they  separated.  The  duty  and  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  council  came  to  this;  and  the  ancient  records  give  no  more 
as  the  portion  of  its  enactments.  But  the  congress  of  the  temporal  powers  then 
made  the  subsequent  part  as  their  enactment:  and  thtN  this  penal  and  civil  re- 
gulation was  not  an  act  of  the  council,  but  an  act  of  the  congress  :  and  it  is  not 
a  canon  concerning  the  doctrine  of  the  church,  nor  indeed  is  it  by  any  means 
a  canon,  though  the  copyists  have  added  it  to  the  ranon  as  regarding  the  very 
same  subject  ;  and  as  confessedly  the  excommunication  in  the  third  canon  re- 
garded only  the  special  case  of  those  particular  heretics,  the  addition  of  the 
penaj  enactment  to  this  narticular  canon  is  confirmatory  evidence  that  thofS 
who  added  it  knew  that  the  penalty-  in  the  one  case  was  only  co-extensive  witli 
the  exconimonication  in  the  other. 

Having  thus  seen  that  this  canon  of  the  Council  of  Lateran  was  not  a  doctrinal 
decision  of  our  church  establishing  the  doctrine  of  persecution,  and  conmiand- 
ing  to  persecute,  but  that  it  was  a  civil  enactment  by  the  temporal  powcragainst 
persons  whom  they  looked  upon  as  criminals,  it  is  more  the  province  of  the  pol- 
itician or  of  the  jurist  than  of  the  divine  to  decide  upon  its  propriety.  I  may, 
however,  be  permitted  to  say  that  in  my  opinion  the  existence  of  civilized  socie- 
ty required  its  enactment,  though  no  good  man  can  approve  of  several  abuses 
which  were  committed  under  the  pretext  of  its  execution,  nor  can  any  rational 
«iau  pretend  that  because  of  the  existence  of  a  special  law  for  a  narticular  pur 


344  DEBATK    ON    THK 

pose,  erery  case  which  may  be  thong-ht  analogous  to  that  for  which  provieicn 
was  made  is  to  be  illegally  subjecUd  lo  those  provisions. 

We  are  now  arrived  at  the  iilace  where  we  may  easily  find  the  origin  and  the 
extent  of  the  papal  power  ot  deposing  sovereigns,  and  of  absolving  subjects 
from  their  oaths  of  allegiance.  To  judge  properly  of  facts,  we  must  know  their 
special  circumstances,  not  their  mere  outline.  Tne  circumstances  of  Christen- 
cioni  were  then  widely  different  from  those  in  which  we  now  are  placed.  Europe 
was  then  under  the  feudal  system.  I  have  seldom  found  a  writer,  not  a  Catholic, 
who.  in  treating  of  that  age  and  that  svstt-m,  has  been  accurate,  and  who  has  not 
done  us  very  serious  injustice.  But  a  fnend  of  mine,  who  is  a  respectable  member 
of  your  honorable  booy,  has  led  me  to  read  Hallam's  account  of  it,  and  I  must 
say  that  I  have  seldom  met  with  so  much  candor,  and,  what  I  call,  so  much 
truth.  From  reading  his  statement  of  that  system  it  will  be  plainly  seen  that 
there  existed  amongst  the  Christian  potentates  a  sort  of  federation,  in  which  they 
bound  themselves  by  certain  regulations,  and  to  the  observance  of  those  they 
were  held  not  merely  by  their  oaths  but  by  various  penalties,  sometimes  they 
consented  the  penalty  should  be  the  loss  of  their  station.  It  was  of  course  ne- 
cessary to  ascertain  that  the  fact  existed  before  its  consequences  should  be  declared 
to  follow  ;  it  was  also  necessary  to  establish  some  tribunal  to  examine  and  to  de- 
cide  asto  the  existence  of  the  fact  itself,  and  to  proclaim  that  existence.  Anio:igst 
independent  sovereigns  there  was  no  superior,  and  it  was  natural  to  fear  that 
mutual  jealousy  would  create  great  difficulty  in  selecting  a  chief;  and  that  what 
originated  in  concession  might  afterwards  be  claimed  as  a  right.  They  were 
however  all  members  of  one  church,  of  which  the  Pope  was  the  head,  and,  in 
this  respect>  their  common  father  :  and  by  universal  consent  it  was  regulate<l 
that  he  should  examine,  ascertain  the  fact,  proclaim  it,  and  declare  its  conse 
quences.  Thus  he  did  in  reality  possess  the  power  of  deposing  monarchs,  and 
of  absolving  their  subjects  from  oaths  of  fealty,  but  only  those  monarchs  who 
were  members  of  that  federation,  and  in  the  case«  legally  provided  for,  and  by 
their  concession,  not  by  divine  right,  and  during  the  term  of  that  federation  aitu 
the  existence  of  his  commission.  He  governed  the  church  bv  divine  right,  he 
deposed  ifings  and  absolved  subjects  from  their  allegiance  by  human  concession. 
I  preach  the  doctrines  of  my  cnnrch  by  divine  right,  but  I  preach  from  this  spot 
not  by  that  right  but  by  the  permission  of  others. 

It  is  not  then  a  doctrine  of  our  church  that  the  pope  has  been  divinely  com- 
missioned either  to  depose  kings  or  to  interfere  with  republics,  or  to  absolve 
the  subjects  of  the  former  from  their  allegiance,  or  interfere  with  the  civil  con- 
cerns of  the  latter.  When  the  persecuted  English  Catholics,  under  Elizabeth, 
found  the  pope  making-  an  unfounded  claim  to  this  right,  and  upon  the  shadow 
of  that  unfounded  right  making  inroads  upon  their  national  independence,  by 
declaring  who  should  or  who  should  not  be  their  temporal  ruler,  they  well 
showed  how  little  they  regarded  his  absolving  them  from  their  allegiance,  for 
they  volunteered  their  services  to  protect  their  liberties,  which  their  Catholic 
ancestors  had  labored  to  establish.  And  she  well  knew  that  a  Catholic  might 
safely  be  entrusted  with  the  admiralty  of  her  fleet,  and  that  her  person  was  Se- 
cure amongst  her  disgraced  Catholic  nobility  and  gentry,  and  their  persecuted 
adherents  ;  although  the  Court  of  Rome  had  issued  its  bull  of  absolution,  and 
some  divines  were  found  who  endeavored  to  prove  that  what  originated  in  vol- 
untary concession  of  states  and  monarchs  was  derived  from  divine  institution. 
If  then  Elizabeth,  of  whose  character  I  would  not  wish  in  this  place  to  express 
my  opinion,  was  safe  amidst  those  whom  she  persecuted  for  their  faith,  even  when 
be  head  of  theirchurch  absolved  them  from  allegiance,  and  if  at  such  a  moment 

ey  flocked  round  her  standard  to  repel  Catholic  invaders  who  came  with  con- 
secrated banners,  and  that  it  is  admitted  on  all  hands  that  in  so  doing  they  vio 
lated  no  principle  of  doctrine  or  of  discipline  of  their  church,  as  we  all  avow" 
surely  America  need  not  fear  for  the  fidelity  of  her  Catholic  citizens,  whom  she 
cherishes  and  whom  she  receives  to  her  bosom  w  ith  affection  and  shelters  from  the 
persecution  of  others.  Neither  will  any  person  attempt  to  establish  an  analogy  be- 
tween our  federation  and  that  of  feudalism,  to  argue  that  the  pope  can  do  amongst 
us  what  he  did  amongst  European  potent:ites  under  circiimstancps  widely  different. 

My  worthy  opponent  said,  that  he  would  only  tmich  on  persecution. 
My  friends,  persecution  had  marked  me  for  a  victim  in  my  native 
land,  and  forced  me  to  seek  an  Asylum  in  America,  when  I  was 
young  and  friendless  !    Persecution  is  there,  in  full  opf  ration  at  this 


ROMAJ^    CATHOLIC    RBLIGIOI*.  345 

rery  hour.  Scarcely  a  hxeeze  comes  across  the  ocean,  without  bring- 
'ng  on  its  wings,  fresh  tidings,  of  blood,  shed  under  Protestant  per- 
secution— by  ministers  of  the  Protestant  faith. 

Widows  there  kneel  in  the  blood  of  their  own  children ;  and,  because 
excess  of  grief  has  made  them  maniacs,  they  drink  that  blood,  and 
curse  the  authors  of  their  misery.  Is  not  this  true  ]  Does  not  the 
universe  know  and  shudder  at  it  I  And  having  been  compelled  to 
flee  from  intolerance,  having  fought  against  it,  must  we  still  see  the 
green-eyed  monster,  trampling  upon  the  vine  and  fig  tree,  here,  where 
we  liad  hoped  to  sit  down  under  their  shade,  in  safety,  and  in  peace, 
with  our  brethren  of  every*  denomination  1  Must  we  still  fear  the 
midnight  knock  at  the  door,  and  the  domiciliary  visit,  by  a  brutal 
soldiery  \  Must  the  perishing  orphans  see  the  bread  taken  out  of 
their  mouths  by  rapacious  parsons,  and  their  mother's  cloak  (their 
only  covering  of  a  wintry  night)  distrained,  to  pay  the  tithe  proctor  ? 
Where  will  you  find  tyranny  like  this  1  Would  this  be  a  better  state 
»f  things,  than  what  we,  in  this  free  country  enjoy?  Bigots  would 
blast  this  glorious  prospect.  They  would  proscribe  one  sect  after 
another.  The  appetite  for  blood,  they  have,  even  noAv,  evinced,  and 
we  know,  when  once  indulged,  how  hard  it  is  to  sate  it !  But  I  must 
call  upon  Protestant  testimony  for  the  wrongs  of  Ireland — and  I  will 
only  touch  upon  the  persecution.  Taylor,  a  graduate  of  Trinity  Col- 
lege, in  his  history  of  Ireland,  says : 

*•  It  would  be  a  mere  waste  of  words  to  reprobate  this  iniquitous  law,  or  ra- 
ther this  violation  of  all  law,  human  anu  divine.  No  Irish  Protestant  can  pe- 
ruse its  enactments  without  a  blush  for  the  shame  thus  brought  on  his  religion, 
when  it  was  thus  virtually  declared  that  the  reformed  system  afaould  owe  its 
itrength  and  security,  not  to  the  purity  of  its  principles,  not  to  the  excellence 
of  its  doctrines,  but  to  robbery  and  oppression,  to  disseiitiou  between  father  and 
child,  to  stimulating  one  neighbor  to  seize  the  fruits  of  another's  industry,  to 
the  desecration  of  a  soleum  sacrament,  by  making  it  a  test  for  office.  How  can  we 
be  surprised  that  the  reformed  religion  is  unpopular  in  Ireland,  when  by  this 
and  similar  laws,  a  Protestant  legislature  virtually  declared  that  Protestantism 
could  not  be  secure  unless  it  entered  into  alliance  with  Belial,  Mammon  and 
Moloch?"  Hist,  of  Ireland,  By  W.  C.  Taylor,  Esq.  A.  B.  of  Trinity  college, 
Dublin,  page  108.  \*n\.  2n;l.   New  York  edit.  1833. 

Now  tell  me  if  the  annals  of  Catholicism  can  produce  any  thing 
like  a  parallel  to  this  !  After  enumerating  the  most  tyrannical  laws 
that  Draco,  or  Dioclecian  ever  enacted,  can  we  discover  more  pro- 
scription— more  cruelty  ? 

My  friends,  I  do  not  blame  the  Protestant  religion  for  this.  It  is 
the  spirit  of  the  country  and  government;  and  the  shame  is,  that 
when  Catholic  governments  have  ceased  to  persecute,  Protestant  one« 
continue  to  do  so. 

My  friends,  were  I  to  consult  my  own  feelings,  I  should  be  better 
pleased  to  draw  a  veil  over  these  horrors ;  but  my  opponent  made  al- 
lusions to  the  inquisition,  as  an  argument  that,  if  ever  the  Catholics 
became  the  most  numerous,  they  would  make  it  a  part  oi  their  system 
to  persecute  :  as  if  the  same  argument,  if  argument  it  can  be  called, 
would  not  be  equally  strong  against  all  the  leading  churches  of  Pro- 
testantism ;  and  if  the  gentleman  makes  any  further  extracts,  I  will 
meet  them  just  in  the  same  way,  and  condemn  both  Catholics  and 
Protestants,  for  that  by  which  they  are  alike  disgraced.  Now,  as 
he  brings  the  account  of  the  inquisition  before  us,  and  proves  it  to  be 
the  most  bloody  tyranny,  setting  aside  all  forms  of  legal  procedure 
&c.,  I  will  refer  you  to  Hume'shistory  of  England,  for  an  inquisi- 

44 


34f>  DEBATE    OiV    TJIE 

tion  equally  terrible,  and  more  unjust,  under  Protestant  Englai.d— « 
the  famous  Star-Chamber,  where,  upon  the  least  suspicion,  without 
proof,  the  officer  was  sent  to  the  houses  of  the  most  distinguished 
men,  nay  even  to  their  beds,  and  forced  them  in  the  dead  of  night 
to  a  prison.  Sir  Thomas  Moore,  bishop  Fisher,  the  aged  countess  of 
Salisbury,  &c.  are  instances  with  which  I  could  fill  up  some  horrific 
pages. 

As  to  oaths  ;  the  gentleman  says  that  I  have  taken  two  which  are 
incompatible  with  each  other.  This  is  not  so.  My  ecclesiastical  oath 
IS  of  a  purely  spiritual  nature.  The  <»*ily  oath  of  allegiance,  of  a 
temporal  character,  which  I  have  ever  taken,  was  to  the  United  States. 
These  two  oaths  cannot  be  incompatible.  The  heavens  and  the  earth 
are  not  more  different  from  one  another,  than  they  are.  They  caunot 
possibly  interfere  with  each  other.  Therefore  the  bishop's  oath  is,  §y_ 
no  means,  what  the  gentleman  has  represented  it.  The  pope  has  ab- 
jured the  odious  sense  which  the  document  is  made  to  bear.  It  is  no 
sin  surely,  to  swear  that  we  will  not  kill  the  pope.  Would  my  friend 
make  it  such  ?  '  Saving  my  order'  is  a  clause  which  the  gentleman 
should  have  expatiated  upon,  and  our  order  is  forbidden,  under  the 
most  awful  penalties,  to  shed  any  one's  blood,  but  our  own,  if  we  are 
called  upon  to  suffer  martyrdom,  and  that  of  the  mystic  victim  of 
the  altar,  as  a  propitiation  for  our  own  sins,  and  those  of  the  entire 
world.  Persequar  was  never  intended  to  mean  persecute.  It  alludes 
to  moral,  not  brute  force.  The  weapons  of  our  warfare  are  spiritual, 
not  carnal.  The  Latin  word  means  only  to  follow  up  with  persever- 
ing argument,  and  persuasion,  as  I  am  doing  this  day.  Before  I  took 
that  oath,  I  read  it  again  and  again,  and  took  the  decisions  of  the 
bishops  of  America  upon  it.  We  all  agreed  that  there  was  nothing 
in  it  contrary  to  the  allegiance  due  to  the  United  States. 

My  friend  spoke  of  Catholics  violating  their  oaths.  I  would  ask 
if  there  is  a  nation  that  has  given  such  splendid  testimony  of  respect 
for  oaths,  as  Catholic  Ireland  ?  For  300  years  of  the  bloodiest  per- 
secution that  was  ever  inflicted,  they  have  steadily  refused  to  take 
an  oath  which  every  thing  but  conscience  urged  them  to  take. 

My  friends,  all  this  ought  to  be  remembered,  not  for  the  gratifica- 
tion of  hostile  feelings,  but  for  justice,  and  as  a  fair  offset,  to  balance 
the  Spanish  Inquisition,  which  is  all  the  w^hile  not  Catholic. — [Time 
expired.] 

Half  past  11  o'clock,  A.  M. 
Mr.  Campbell  rises — 

We  have,  my  friends,  had  matter  of  debate  thrown  before  us  durng 
the  last  hour,  that  would  require  seven  days  more  to  discuss.  An 
ocean  instead  of  a  harbor  opens  to  our  view.  Good  policy,  however ' 
Instead  of  concentrating  on  the  main  points,  which,  above  all  others, 
it  behooved  the  bishop  to  clear  up,  if,  indeed,  he  had  any  hopes  of  being 
able  to  defend  himself,  he  gives  us  a  little  of  every  thing,  great  and 
small ;  present,  past,  and  future.  Thirty  minutes  would  not  be  enough 
for  me  to  single  out,  arrange,  and  state  the  contrary  propositions,  to 
cover  all  his  tast  premises.  As  the  gentleman  knows  what  he  can  best 
defend,  and  what  he  cannot,  and  as  his  time  is  at  his  own  disposal,  I 
have  no  riarht  to  complain.  I  proceed,  therefore,  not  to  recapitulate 
my  argument,  as  I  expected  we  both  would  have  done  in  our  last 


SOMAN  CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  347 

speeches:  but  to  brush  the  dust  off  a  few  of  the  prominent  points, 
crowded  together  in  his  last  effort. 

The  bishop's  denial  of  the  gfenuineness  of  this  Rhemish  TestaTnent^ 
at  this  time,  is  exceedingly  unfair;  and  still  worse,  from  whatever  mo- 
tive it  may  proceed,  it  is  wholly  reckless  of  history  and  fact.  I  say  it 
is  unfair;  because,  when  near  the  beginning  of  the  debate,  I  showed 
him  the  Testament,  and  challenged  him  to  object  to  it  if  he  had  any- 
thing against  it,  that  it  might  be  settled  forthwith,  he  was  silent.  I 
went  even  farther — I  asked  him  for  another  copy,  or  edition,  of  it  more 
correct,  if  he  had  one:  he  was  still  silent.  And  now,  at  the  close,  he 
has  held  up  the  Douay  Bible,  without  these  notes,  published  long 
since,  not  pretending  to  be  the  same  work,  either  as  to  time,  place,  or 
circumstance,  as  proof  that  this  edition  of  the  New  Testament  is  not 
authentic!  But  my  audience,  and  the  public,  will  appreciate  all  this. 
I  do  assert,  then,  and  my  assertion  has  as  much  logic  in  it  as  his,  that 
the  gentleman  has  misrepresented  this  affair — that  this  book  is  truly 
what  its  title  page  declares  it;  and  that  both  the  text  and  the  notes  are 
as  truly  Roman  Catholic  as  the  Douay  Bible.     Hear  the  title: 

"Thf  New  Testaiiunt  of  our  Lord  and  Savior  Jesus  Christ;  translated  out 
of  the  Latin  Vulgate,  diligently  compared  with  the  original  Greek,  and  first  pub- 
lished by  the  English  college  of  Rheinis,  Anno  1582:  with  the  Original  Preface, 
Arguments,  and  Tables,  Marginal  Notes  and  Annotations." 

Again:  hear  the  recommendation  of  this  work  by  "ministers  of  the 
gospel,  and  other  learned  persons  of  various  denominations."  They 
say,  "This  edition  contains  all  the  notes  of  the  original  edition  as  pub- 
lished at  Rheims,  A.  D.  1582."  Not  a  new  and  amended  impression, 
suppressing  the  more  offensive  comments,  but  the  original  itself.  This 
recommendation  is  signed  by  more  than  a  hundred  gentlemen  of  as 
much  literary  and  religious  reputation  as  can  be  found  in  the  U.  States. 
Once  more : 

Certificate. — We  have  compared  this  New  York  edition  of  the  Rhemish 
Testament  and  Annotations  with  the  first  publication  of  that  volume,  which  wag 
issued  at  Rheinis  in  1582;  and  after  examination,  we  do  hereby  certify,  that  the 
present  re-print  is  an  exact  and  faithful  copy  of  the  original  work,  without 
abridgment  or  addition,  except  that  the  Latin  of  a  few  phrases  which  were  trans- 
lated by  the  annotators.  and  some  unimportant  expletive  words  were  undesign- 
edly omitted.     The  orthography  also  has  been  modernized. 

John  Breckiptridge. 

William  C.  Brownlee,  D.  D. 

Thomas  De  Witt,  D.  D. 

Duncan  Dunhar. 

Archibald  Maclay. 

William  Patton. 
To  all  these  certificates  there  are  not  less  than  one  hundred  and  thirty 
tiamcs.  But  the  gentleman's  calling  this  authority  in  question,  is  in 
good  keeping  with  his  whole  course.  There  is  no  authority  against 
the  church  of  Rome — neither  Protestant  nor  Catholic  to  be  believed, 
if  they  say  any  thing  against  her.  But  infidels,  and  such  Protestants 
as  flatter  her  in  her  assumptions,  are  canonical  as  holy  writ!  If  the 
bishop  is  to  be  believed,  all  Protestant  historians,  theologians,  authors, 
&c.  opposed  to  the  Roman  assumptions,  are  liars.  In  proof  and  de- 
monstration of  the  super-excellency  of  Protestant  principles,  and  of  the 
debasing,  degrading,  and  enslaving  principles  of  the  papacy,  I  intended 
to  have  drawn  a  full  comparison  between  the  Protestant  and  Catholic 
parts  of  Ireland;  the  Protestant  and  Catholic  countries  of  Switzer- 
land— between    Spain,  Italy,  Portugal,    and    Protestant    England— 


348  DEBATE    ON    THE  ^ 

between  the  United  States  and  the  South  American  States — ^between 
Protestant  and  Roman  Catholic  America.  But  I  cannot  now  attemp* 
it ;  and  much  do  I  regret  it :  for  such  a  comparison  fairly  Hrawn,  would 
amount  to  the  most  satisfactory  demonstration  of  the  political,  literary, 
and  moral  tendencies  of  the  two  systems.  Plain,  as  proof  from  holy 
■wri^j  it  would  thus  have  appeared,  that  this  superstition,  like  the  touch 
of  the  torpedo,  lays  a  benumbincr,  paralizing,  and  blighting  hand  on 
all  within  its  grasp. 

The  gentleman  is  yet  on  indulgences  and  purgatory,  when  he  ought, 
in  reply  to  my  last  speech,  to  have  endeavored,  if  possible,  to  relieve 
his  cause  from  imputations  the  most  serious  and  the  most  revolting  to 
American  ears.  I  have  not  thought  it  important  to  descant  upon  the 
tariff  of  sins,  or  to  give  a  tabular  view  of  the  prices  at  which  certain 
sins  were  rated  in  gold  and  silver  in  the  market  of  indulgences.  Noi 
have  I  at  all  inquired  why,  in  this  tax-book,  for  killing  a  layman  a  less 
sum  is  asked  than  for  simply  striking  a  priest,  without  breaking  the 
skin.  These  questions,  though  capable  of  solution  from  authentic  docu- 
ments, are  the  dreams  of  purgatory  I  deem  so  inferior,  and  so  un- 
blushingly  barefaced  impositions,  that  I  prefer  matters  of  more  grave 
concern  to  this  community  for  the  time  allotted  us.  That  indulgences 
are  bona  fide  licenses  to  commit  sin,  and  not  simple  absolution  for  past 
sins,  is  as  susceptible  of  proof  as  that  Martin  Luther  began  the  Protes- 
tant reformation. 

The  gentleman  will  not  defend  *>he  popes,  he  says,  in  their  attempts 
to  exercise  supreme  political  power ;  but  asks,  "  Did  the  kings  of  the 
nations  ever  acquiesce  in  it?"  That  kings  for  centuries  received  and 
held  their  crowns  at  the  sovereign  pleasure  of  the  popes,  is  just  as  ob- 
vious a  historic  fact,  as  that  there  were  popes  at  all.  Sometimtes,  in 
deed,  the  kings  fought  against  these  assumptions,  and  sometimes  they 
acquiesced.  But  the  ready  subordination  of  the  state  to  the  church 
evinced  in  the  magistrates  executing  the  anathemas  of  the  church,  in 
putting  to  death  those  denoted  as  heretics  by  the  church,  shows  in  what 
a  state  of  subserviency  and  pliancy  political  princes  were  held  by  the 
popes.  That  is  just  the  very  terror  of  church  and  state — the  very 
supremacy  which  we  fear,  and  which  is  so*  antipodal  to  our  institutions. 

It  is  putting  heretics  or  reformers  to  death,  and  supporting  a  human 
priesthood  by  the  state  according  to  the  dictation  of  the  church,  which 
makes  that  union,  or  subserviency,  so  wicked  and  odious  in  our  estima- 
tion. And  will  the  gentleman  ask,  what  Roman  Catholic  state,  nation, 
or  prince,  ever  did  such  a  thing  ] ! 

In  his  counter  displays  of  Roman  Catholic  doctrine,  my  friend  has 
not  given  you  the  trans-Alpine  doctrine.  The  Cis-Alpine,  or  Gallican 
doctors,  are  not  of  the  old  Roman  Catholic  school.  They  are  almost 
semi-protestant  on  those  very  points  on  which  he  has  introduced  them. 
They  are  no  evidence  against  the  standard  doctrines  of  that  church 
on  these  questions.  The  French  Catholics  began  to  stand  aloof  from 
the  high  and  haughty  pretensions  of  their  trans-montane  brethren. 
They  are  the  most  liberal  portion  of  the  Roman  church,  and  have,  con- 
sequently, done  more  for  the  promotion  of  science  than  all  the  rest  of 
the  Catholic  world  put  together.     Bishop  England  gives  their  views 

I  asked  for  an  authentic  disclaimer  of  the  attributes  of  the  Roman 
church,  and  of  those  acts  and  deeds  indicative  of  her  tyrannical,  op- 
pressive and  persecuting  spirit  which  I  have  detailed,    1  ask  this  still  • 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    REIilGIOJT.  349 

and  while  I  do  it  in  a  tone  indicative  of  that  earnestnes3  which  the 
occasion  requires,  I  do  it  in  the  same  benevolence  to  my  opponent  and 
his  party  which  I  felt  and  expressed  at  the  beginning  of  this  discus- 
sion. The  times  and  the  occasion  peremptorily  demand  it.  We  know 
what  individual  priests  and  bishops  have  said  against  popes  and  coun- 
cils, and  their  proceedings,  and  against  other  parts  of  that  system  :  but 
these  are  said  for  effect  ad  captandum  vulgus,  and  will  be  unsaid  by 
the  same  individuals,  or  by  others,  when  occasion  requires.  I  have 
brought  very  serious  allegations  against  the  Roman  Catholic  institu- 
tion, and  authorities  for  them — all  of  them  authentic,  and  most  of  them 
never  disputed  by  my  opponent.  He  disclaims  these  principles,  acts 
and  movements  :  but  he  disproves  not  one  of  them.  Nor  would  the 
disclaiming  of  them  by  all  the  bishops  in  America,  disprove  one  of 
them.  The  council  of  Trent  has  ordained  and  enjoined  all  these  prin- 
ciples of  implicit  and  blind  obedience,  intolerance,  proscription,  and 
persecution.  No  council  has  since  met,  and  no  power  but  a  general 
council  can  define  a  single  article  of  faith,  or  rule  of  manners,  accord- 
ing to  the  declarations  of  my  antagonist.  Indeed,  the  doctrine  of  the 
council  of  Trent  must  remain  immutable  and  infallible  while  time  en- 
dures, according  to  him  :  for  no  other  general  council  can  possibly 
contravene  it ;  and,  therefore,  while  the  Roman  church  exists,  she 
must  be,  what  1  have  shoVn  she  was,  before  and  since  the  council  of 
Trent. 

This  council  met  in  a  boisterous  time.  They  met  to  oppose  and  put 
down  Protestantism.  They  knew  the  allegations  of  Protestants 
against  their  doctrine.  If  then,  they  could  have  abandoned  those  prin- 
ciples for  the  sake  of  either  reclaiming  or  defeating  the  Lutherans, 
that  was  the  time  to  do  it.  They  sat  long  enough,  and  debated  with 
zeal  enough  ;  and  yet  they  dare  not  discuss  the  papal  authority.  The 
pope  forbade  them  to  debate  his  office,  jurisdiction,  or  authority,  and 
they  did  not  attempt  it.  The  pope  signed  their  decrees,  and  all  that  was 
done  there  was  done  irrevocably  and  forever.  The  disavowal  or  the 
disclaiming  of  any  priest  or  bishop  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church,  is 
not  worth  more,  and  has  no  more  authority,  than  mine.  It  is,  therefore, 
of  no  value  for  my  learned  opponent,  or  any  American  prelate  to  say 
that  he  does  not  approve  this  or  that;  or,  agree  to  this  or  that.  They 
must  all  submit  to,  and  they  will  all  inculcate  on  all  suitable  occa- 
sions, every  decree  of  the  council  of  Trent.  'Thus  did  the  Jesuits  in 
Abyssinia.  They  first  explained  away  every  thing:  but  finally  ex- 
plained it  back  again,  and  had  almost  saddled  the  pope  and  the  coun- 
cil of  Trent  forever  on  those  unfortunate  Abyssinians. 

I  could,  had  I  the  time  now,  from  that  very  history  of  Ireland  from 
which  the  gentleman  read  you  an  extract,  a  copy  of  which  I  too  have 
lying  on  the  table, — I  say,  I  can  from  this  book  show  that  the  ancient 
christian  church  of  Ireland  was  subjugated  to  the  church  of  Rome,  by 
this  very  species  of  rhetoric,  and  that  finally  the  whole  island  was 
enslaved  to  the  pope  by  the  same  means:  for  in  England,  Scotland, 
Wales,  and  Ireland,  there  were  Christian  churches,  ages  before  the 
popes  of  Rome  were  born.  But  by  this  chamelion  attribute  of  becom- 
ing all  things  to  all  men,  for  a  while,  she  has  made  all  men  become 
what  she  pleases. 

Thus  by  degrees  under  this  system,  the  human  spirit  is  broken,  de- 
f  *aded  and  debased,  night  ensues,  and  finally,  gross  darkness  covers 
2  E 


350 


DEBATE    OX    TUE 


the  people.  Even  in  Canada  since  the  papacy  bas  gained  the  ascend- 
ency, laws  have  been  passed  in  the  provipcial  assemblies,  giving  tc 
school  commissioners  and  grand  jurors  the  privilege  of"  making  Iheir 
mark,  instead  tf  writing  their  names  .'"  Nothing  can  preserve  our  re- 
publican institutions  but  a  system  of  intellectual  and  mcral  culture, 
accessible  to  every  child  born  upon  our  soil  or  brought  to  our  shores. 
Unless  we  thus  benevolently  co-operate  in  this  great  cause  of  human- 
ity, this  last  and  best  hope  of  the  oppressed  of  all  nations  will  vanish 
from  the  earth,  and  a  new  and  ghostly  despotism  shall  arise  and  ex- 
tend its  iron  sceptre  over  this  our  beloved  land.  Nothing  but  intelli- 
gence anl  virtue  universally  diffused,  can  save  us  from  this  dread  ca- 
tastrophe. In  Protestant  Prussia,  with  a  Roman  Catholic  minority, 
they  understand  so  well  the  importance  and  utility  of  education,  and 
its  power  to  dissipate  the  darkness  of  superstition,  always  tyrannical, 
that  every  child  is  by  law  compelled  to  be  educated,  and  that  morally 
as  well  as  intellectually. 

There  remains  an  important  point  or  two  yet  to  be  noticed.  The 
gentleman  is  exceedingly  squeamish  in  his  avowals  of  this  oath,  which 
forever  binds  the  Roman  priesthood  to  the  court  of  Rome.  He  admits, 
however,  that  after  due  consultation  or  meditation  liad  he  took  the 
oath,  clauses  of  which  constrain  him  to  "  increase  and  advance  the 
authority  of  the  pope,"  and  to  "persecute  and  oppose  heretics  and 
schismatics."     He  says  perseqvar  means  not  to  persecute. 

Bishop  Puecell.     It  means  to  follow,  and  nothing  more. 

Mr.  Campbell.  It  is  a  genetic  term,  and  means  to  follow  with  the 
sword  or  faggot,  or  the  liaiid  or  foot,  only  in  the  way  of  opposition, 
however.  Seq^uor  is  to  follow,  but  persequor  is  to  follow  with  ven- 
geance. 

I  have  learned  this  morning  that  it  can  be  proved  under  oath  that  all 
the  bishops  in  America  have  taken  this  oath;  and  that  without  equivo- 
cation or  mental  reservation;  of  which  fact,  however,  I  was  before 
apprised;  but  the  gentleman  himself  has  admitted  it,  and  I  pursue  it 
no  further.  I  am,  however,  disappointed  to  observe  that  he  has  been 
at  no  pains  to  reconcile  his  allegiance  to  two  governments  so  singu- 
larly repugnant  to  each  other  in  all  their  elements  and  tendencies. 

My  friend  fled  from  persecution  in  Ireland!  From  paj'ing  </<A«»',  1 
suppose,  according  to  the  Levitieal  law !  Well,  this  tithe  system  is 
a  failing  concern,  and  will  soon  pass  away.  But  is  not  this,  iiis  perse- 
cution, an  ingenious  ofi'-set  to  fifty  millions  of  martyrs  sacrificed  by 
the  papal  power? !  Some  are  whispering  that  this  Roman  persecu- 
ting spirit  is  dying  away  as  the  tithe  system.  Let  those,  however,, 
who  think  so,  in  addition  to  what  I  have  already  read  from  va- 
rious sources,  accept  a  few  words  from  the  "Plea  for  the  West" — 
from  the  2d  ed.  of  M.  Aiguan,  of  the  French  Academy  in  Paris, 
A.  D.  181S  : 

"Passing  to  the  10th  article  of  the  Concordat,  in  which  it  is  said  that 
his  Most  Christian  Majesty  shall  employ,  in  concert  with  the  Holy  Father, 
all  the  means  in  his  power  to  cause  to  cease,  as  soon  as  possible,  all  the 
disorders  and  obstacles  which  obstruct  the  welfare  of  religion  and  the 
execution  of  the  laws  of  the  church — were  [the  Protestants]  to  ask  (al- 
thougb  the  profuse  shedding  of  their  blood  might  have  informed  them). 
What  are  the  laws  of  the  church  ?  The  acts  of  Pius  VII.  himself,  and 
the  writings  on  which  the  church  rests  her  authoritj-,  would  answer,  thk 

EXTKEMIXATIOJf    OF    HERETICS,    THE    CONFISCATION    OF    THEIR    GOODS,  AND 
THEIR  PRIVATION    OF  EVERY  CIVIL  PRIVILEGE." 

To  this  the  author  subjoins  a  uote:  "Ccrtaiu  ptortions  of  real  estate  which  had 


ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION  351 

belonged  to  ecclesiastics,  had  passed  into  the  hands  of  Protestant  princes.  Pius  VII. 
io  1805,  complained  ofit  to  his  nuncio  residing  at  Vieiina;and  reminded  him  that, 
according  to  the  laws  of  the  church,  not  oidy  could  not  heretics  possess  ec- 
clesiastical property,  but  that  also  they  could  not  possess  any  property  whatever, 
since  the  crime  of  heresy  ought  to  be  punished  by  the  confiscation  of  eooiis. 
He  added  that  the  subjects  of  a  prince,  who  is  a  heretic,  should  be  released  from 
every  duty  to  him,  freed  from  all  obligation  and  all  homage.  'In  truth,' said  he, 
*  we  have  fallen  on  times  so  calamitous,  and  so  humiliating  to  the  spouse  of  Jesus 
Christ,  that  it  is  not  possible  for  her  to  practise,  nor  expedient  to  recall  so  holy 
maxims;  and  she  is  forced  to  interrupt  the  course  of  her  just  severities  against 
the  enemies  of  the  faith.  But  if  she  cannot  exercise  her  right  to  depose  the 
partizans  of  heresy  from  their  principalities,  and  declare  that  they  have  forfeited 
all  their  goods;  can  she  ever  permit  that,  to  enrich  themselves,  they  should 
despoil  her  of  her  own  proper  dominions?  What  a  subjectof  derision — would 
she  not  present  to  these  very  heretii's  and  unbelievers,  who,  whi!^  they  insr-lted 
her  grief,  would  say  they  had  discovered  the  method  of  rendering  her  tolerant? 

"The  same  pontitf  in  his  instructions  to  his  agents  in  Poland,  given  in  1808, 
professes  this  doctrine,  that  the  laws  of  tiie  church  do  not  recognize  any  civil 
privileges  as  belonging  to  persons  not  Catholic;  that  their  marriages  are  not 
valid;  that  they  can  live  only  in  concubinage;  that  their  children,  being  bas- 
tards, are  incapacitated  to  inherit;  that  the  Catholics  themselves  are  not  validly 
married,  except  they  are  united  according  to  the  rules  prescribed  bv  the  court  of 
Rome;  and  that,  when  they  are  married  according  to  these  rules,  their  marriage 
is  valid,  had  they  in  other  respects  infringed  all  the  laws  of  their  country." — 
Quarterly  Register,  vol.  3.  p.  89. 

Jlemember  then,  that  according  to  the  acts  of  Pius  VII.  the  laws  of 
the  church  still  command  the  exiermhuition  of  heretics — the  confiscation 
of  their  goods,  and  t/ieir  deprivation  of  every  privilege — that  Protestanti 
have  no  privileges  ,•  and  that  the  present  calm  is  owing,  not  to  a  change 
of  spirit,  but  of  times  :  for  says  the  pope  :  "  the  times  are  so  calamitous 
— (hat  the  church  is  forced  to  interrupt  the  course  of  her  just  severities 
against  the  enemies  of  the  faith  !"  These  are  truly  calamitous 
times  !  !     Alas  for  prosperous  days ! 

I  am  indeed  sorry  that  our  debate  has  been  so  much  out  of  logical 
order.  An  issue  hns  never  been  fairly  and  fully  formed  on  one  of  my 
propositions.  My  friend  occupied  the  ground  which  he  chose.  He 
was  respondent.  How  he  has  responded,  it  remains  for  others  to 
judge.  He  has  been  positive  and  declamatory  enough,  and  very  scru- 
pulous about  "  mint,  anise  and  cummin  :"  but  how  have  the  great  to- 
pics been  met?  I  rejoice,  however,  that  it  will  go  to  the  public,  as  it 
was  spoken,  and  that  the  public  will  read  and  judge. 

I  have  heard  a  hint  that  the  gentleman  is  about  to  disprove  the  fact 
of  the  anathema  or  bishop's  curse  by  introducing  Sterne,  turning  into 
ridicule  the  curses  pronounced  centuries  before  he  was  born.  The 
humor  of  Sterne  found  the  reality  of  the  curse,  or  he  would  not  have 
laughed  at  it. 

The  gentleman  has  now  to  close  the  debate.  The  usages  of  discus- 
sion forbid  the  introduction  of  new  matter  in  the  last  speech.  He  will 
robably  again  tell  you  of  Catholic  devotion  to  American  liberty,  and 
f  his  brother  soldiers,  that  fought  in  the  Revolutionary  war.  For,  by 
Buch  argimients  he  has  generally  met  the  decrees  of  councils,  the  bulla 
of  popes,  the  records  of  history,  and  the  precepts  of  the  apostles.  But 
before  the  devotion  of  a  few  Roman  Catholic  soldiers  to  the  cause  of 
the  Revolution  can  be  accepted  as  proof  of  Roman  Catholic  love  of 
either  civil  or  religious  liberty,  it  must  be  ascertained,  whether  the 
hatred  of  Protestant  England,  rather  than  the  love  of  rational  liberty, 
instigated  those  soldiers  that  served  during  that  war.     For  ray  part,  1 


352  DEBATE    ON    THE 

incline  to  the  opinion  that  the  hatred  of  England  was  at  least  as  strong 
an  impulse  to  their  efforts  as  the  love  of  liberty. — But — [Time  ex- 
pired.] 

Twelve  o'clock,  M. 
Bishop  Purceli.  rises — 

My  friends,  in  order  to  meet  one  of  the  last  allegations  of  the  gen- 
tleman, namely,  that  the  Catholic  church  has  a  law,  making  Protest- 
ant children  illegitimate  ;  I  know  of  no  law  to  that  effect,  which  ad- 
mits of  the  least  practical  difficulty ;  but  I  will  tell  you  where  it  is 
still  in  force,  and  imposes  civil  disabilities  and  disqualifications  of  the 
most  odious  character.  It  is  in  a  Protestant  country.  And,  here,  let 
me  say,  once  for  all,  that  I  judge  too  highly  of  the  character  of  Scots- 
men and  Englishmen,  and  know  too  well  that  they  detest  these  laws 
as  much  as  1  do,  to  mean  anything  disrespectful  to  them,  ivhen  T  al- 
lude to  the  acts  of  the  British  government,  or  the  malpractices  of  in- 
dividuals. Scotland  has  done  much  for  science.  Eagle-like  she  has 
soared  to  its  sunniest  heights.  May  she  battle,  like  the  Bruce,  by  the 
side  of  O'Connell,  for  human  rights.  But,  facts  are  facts.  No\.-, 
a  Unitarian  minister,  Mr.  Dewey,  whom  I  have  already  quoted,  says : 

"The  dissenters  are  demanding  to  be  rtlieved  from  their  burdens.  Petitioni 
to  parliament,  either  for  au  entire  abolition  of  the  union  between  church  and 
state,  or  for  an  essential  moditication  of  that  union,  have,  it  is  well  known,, be- 
come matters  of  almost  everj-  day  occurrence.  There  is  a  determination  on  thit 
point,  which  must  at  length  succeed;  and  1  must  say,  indeed,  from  my  own  im- 
pressions about  the  hardsliips  o{  tht:  cstse,  that  if  the  dissenters — if  those  whose  co«- 
scinnces  and  properly  and  personal  respectability  are  alike  invaded  by  the  church 
establishment,  will  not  cause  Iheir  voice,  and  the  voice  of  justice  to  be  lieard,  tliey 

deserve  to  be  oppressed If  the  church   endowments  were  a  bequest  for  the 

benefit  of  any  particular  class  of  christians,  it  was  for  the  Catholics.  The  lar- 
gest portion  of  them  ivere  actually  Catholic  endowments.  If  it  is  proper  that 
they  should  be   diverted  from  that  original  design  at  all,  it  ought  at  least  to  be 

done  in  aid  and  furtherance  of  the  whole  religion   of  the  countrj' JVo  man 

I  think,  can  travel  through  this  country  without  knowingthat  the  dissenters  are 
frequently  treated  in  a  manner  amounting^to  absolute  indignity!  As  to  the  in- 
justice of  the  system,  it  is  well  known.  The  dissenter  is  excluded  fiomthe  uni- 
versities. In  fact,  he  can  neither  be  born,  nor  baptized,  nor  married,  nor  buried, 
but  under  the  opprobrium  of  the  law.  That  is  to  say,  there  can  be  no  legal  regis- 
tration of  his  birth;  his  baptismal  certificate  does  not  entitle  him  tole^al  marriage: 
and  he  can  receive  neither  marriage,  nor  burial  from  the  hands  of  his  own  pastor. 

And  now  what  is  alleged  in  defence  of  this  state  of  things?  K^o  principle  or 
pretence  of  justice  that  I  have  ever  heard,  but  only  the  principle  of  expedi- 
ency. It  is  said  that  monopoly  and  exclusion  here  are  necessary.  It  is  said  ihat 
religion  cannot  be  supported  in  dignity  and  honor,  without  ample  endowments 
and  rich  benefices."     Vol.  I.  p.  143. 

Such  is  the  state  of  England  in  the  enlightened  nineteenth  century, 
and  a  pretty  state  it  certainly  is  !   Thus,  on  incontrovertible  testimony, 
that  of  the  nation  at  large,  are  monopoly  and  exclusion  necessary  to  th 
support  of  a  system  which  Mr.  Campbell  has  solemnly  declared  to  be 
the  only  bulwark  of  the  Protestant  religion  ! ! 

My  friends,  for  those  tremendous  curses  which  you  have  heard,  and 
at  which  you  have  laughed  so  heartily  !  I  must  spoil  or  heighten  the 
fun  by  telling  you  that  they  are  not  Catholic  curses,  nor  yet  Protes- 
tant curses  exactly,  but  that  they  are  the  jett  cPesprit  of  a  Protestant 
minister,  Lawrence  Sterne,  all  found  in  this  book  (exhibiting  it,) 
which  Ihave  had  brought  me,  this  moment,  from  a  book  store,  written 
by  that  worthy  parson  hims(?lf,  and  one  of  the  most  grossly  obscene 
in  the  English  language  !  !  Verily,  my  opponent  has  given  me,  in  this 
finale,  a  oieasurc  of  revenge  which  I  would  not,  myself,  have  asked 


ROMAW   CATHOJLIC    RELIGIOW.  353 

for.  And  he  had  these  curses,  stowed  away  for  years,  on  that  hit  of 
soiled  paper,  to  be  produced  as  the  coup  de  grace  to  the  Catliolics,  at 
the  close  of  this  debate.  I  saw  these  curses,  when  some  waggish 
wight  had  them  published,  in  Philadelphia  ;  and  the  moment  he  men- 
tioned them,  I  wrote  on  my  notes,  "  Sterne,"  "  Tristram  Shandy,"  and 
sent  for  tlie  book !  Dr.  Slop  c\]ts  his  finger,  untying  a  certain  case  of 
instruments :  he  whistles  Lillebulero,  to  ease  the  pain  ;  and  Uncle 
Toby,  or  his  nephew,  with  Cervantic  grarity,  swears  by  Juno's  beard 
to  me  genuineness  of  these  curses,  and  hands  them  to  Dr.  Slop,  to 
read  by  way  of  an  anodyne !  But,  seriously,  in  the  28th  chapter  of 
Deuteronomy,  are  to  be  found  curses,  as  awful  as  these  here  pro- 
lounccd.  Must  we  mock  God  that  inspired,  or  the  scripture  that  re- 
cords them?  Now  the  bible  itself  is  turned  into  ridicule  by  the  gentleman' 
Christian  charity  and  common  sense,  truth  and  justice,  require  im- 
peratively, that  no  one  should  be  condemned  without  a  hearing,  oi 
charged  with  holding  sentiments  which  he  disavows.  Here  is  the 
fullest,  the  clearest,  the  most  unequivocal  disavowal,  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  pope's  deposing  power.  The  Catholics  do  not  believe  that  he 
has  any  such  power."  We  would  be  among  the  first  to  oppose  him  in 
its  exercise  ;  and  we  would  be  neither  heretics  nor  bad  Catholics;  and 
we  each  of  us  bishops  swear  the  very  words  of  the  oath  ;  ^^Fersequar 
et  tmpugnabo,  salvo  meo  ordine,"  in  the  sense  specified,  which  is  the 
only  true  sense,  the  assumption  of  any  such  power  by  the  pope,  or  the 
pope  for  the  assumption  of  any  such  power.    For  ten  centuries  this 

POWER  WAS    NEVER    CLAIMED  BY  ANY  POPE.       It  CAN,  THEREFORE,  BE  NO 

PART  OF  Catholic  doctrine.  It  has  not  gained  one  foot  of  land 
FOR  the  pope.  It  is  not  any  where  believed,  or  acted  upon,  in 
the  Catholic  church.  Nor  can  it  be,  at  this  late  day,  estab- 
lished, IF  ANY  MAN  COULD  BE  FOUND  MAD  ENOUGH  TO  MAKE  THE  AT- 
TEMPT. Let  these  go  before  the  American  people,  as  the  real  princi- 
ples of  Catholics  concerning  the  power  of  the  pope.  And  if  we  must 
pronounce  a  judgment  on  the  past,  let  it  be  remembered,  that  when 
the  pope  did  use  this  power,  it  was  when  appealed  to  as  a  common 
father,  and  in  favor  of  the  oppressed !  We  should  go  back,  in  spirit, 
to  former  times,  when  we  undertake  to  judge  them.  We  should  un- 
derstand the  condition  of  society  at  the  period  ;  we  should  know  the 
circumstances,  general  and  particular,  which  controlled  or  influenced 
the  great  events  recorded  in  history.  We  should  not  quarrel  with  our 
ancestors,  because  they  did  not  possess  knowledge  which  we  possess ; 
nor  flatter  ourselves  that  we  are  vastly  their  better"  because  of  these 
ad vlhtitious  advantages;  while  they  manifestly  surpass  us  in  others 
of  greater  value,  to  the  Christian,  the  moralist,  the  artist.  They  had 
the  substance  of  good  things  :  we  seem  to  be  content  with  the  shadow 
of  them.  The  very  efforts  now  made  by  fanatical  preachers,  and  pe- 
titioners to  congress,  to  proscribe  Roman  Catholics,  clearly  show  that 
we  art  far  behind  them  in  the  regard  foi  truth,  and  the  exercise  of 
tolerati.>n.  Let  it  never  be  forgotten,  what  the  sect  was,  of  what  reli- 
gion tht  men  were,  who  first  petitioned  congress,  in  this  free  country,  to 
res'rict,  ( r,  to  use  a  more  appropriate  word,  to  abolish  liberty  of  conscience, 
andtofnr-'i  a  Christian  party  in  politics.  They  were  not  Roman  Catholics, 
Tlie  B\''  of  Gregory  XVI.  censures  bad  books.  He  condemns  not 
the  liberty  but  the  licentiousness  of  the  press.  And  is  he  not  right ! 
Can  there  ht  »  ajeater  corrupter  of  morals  than  bad  books  1  Did  not 
2k2  23 


354  DEBATE    ON    THE 

St.  Paul  bum  bad  books  to  the  amount  of  5000  pieces  of  silver,  as  W6 
read  in  Acts  xix.  19]  Is  it  not  actionable  in  England  and  the  United 
States  to  publish  books  against  the  existence  of  God  ?  You  see  whzrt 
one-sided  views,  some  would  he  great  men  can  take,  of  the  doings  of 
popes.  The  gentleman  blew  up  the  bible,  and  all  the  mysteries  of 
Christianity,  and  himself  with  them,  when  he  tried  to  blast  the  rock 
of  Peter;  is  it  wonderful  that  he  should  implicate  St.  Paul,  and  Eng- 
lish and  American  common  and  statute  law,  when  he  would  blow  up 
tlie  good  old  pope,  Gregory  XVI.  * 

In  a  rescript  addressed  by  his  holiness  Pius  VII.  to  the  vicars  apos- 
tolic of  Great  Britain,  dated  the  8th  of  April,  1820,  his  holiness  ex- 
horts them  to  take  care  that 

"  The  faithful  abstaia  from  reading'  tlie  wicked  books,  ii:  which  in  these  calam- 
itous times,  our  religion  is  assailed  from  all  sides ;  and  that  they  should  be  strength- 
ened in  faith  and  good  works,  by  the  reading  of  pious  books,  and  particularly  the 
holy  scriptures,  in  editions  approved  by  the  church — you  preceding  them  by  word 
and  example."  "Ut  a  perversorum  librorum  lectione,quibus,calairiitc>sissiniis  hisc* 
temporibussancta  nostra  Religio  undique  impetitur,  abstioeant;  ut  pioruu)  libro 
rum,  pnesertimscripturarura  sacrarum  lectione,  inedttionibus  ab  Ecclesia  appro 
batis  in  fide  et  in  bonis  operibus,  vobis  verbo  et  exenaplopraeuntibus.conforten 
tur." 

"  In  the  reign  of  Louis  XIV.  of  France,  at  the  suggestion  of  Bossuet,  bishop  of 
Meaux,  50,000  copies  of  the  new  Testament  in  the  vernacular  tongue,  were  dis 
tributed  in  the  provinces."     See  vindication  of  religious  Ordei"s,  No.  40,  3d,  vol. 

The  Index  is  a  book  of  which  I  have  never  had  a  copy  ;  and  no  Ca- 
tholic, that  I  know  of,  in  the  United  States,  has  ever  seen  it.  The 
law  of  nature  is  as  much  of  an  "  Index"  as  that  volume,  for  it  forbids 
us  to  read  bad  books  which  the  index-finger  of  conscience  points  to 
us  as  evil,  with  the  word — Beware  !  The  gentleman  greatly  mis- 
takes the  Catholic  doctrine,  the  morals  of  Catholics,  the  politics,  the 
intellects  of  Catholics.  I  trust,  as  he  becomes  more  enlightened,  he 
will  think  better  of  them.  I  am  sure  this  audience,  and  the  public 
will.  All  see  by  the  crowds  of  Catholics  thronging,  to  the  very  las' 
moment,  to  this  debate,  how  free  and  fearless  of  the  investigation  of 
their  faith*  they  are,  and  feel.  They  have  had  the  full  benefit  of  al' 
the  gentleman's  sophistry  and  extracts;  and  the  effect  is  infinitely 
better  for  Catholicism  than  any  sermon  that  I,  or  any  Catholic  bishop 
in  the  union,  has  ever  preached  to  them.  They  see  that,  with  all  the 
gentleman's  learning  and  talents,  he  has  utterly  failed  to  establish  a 
single  one  of  his  propositions.  Hence  they  will  be  more  attached  to 
their  faith  than  ever. 

As  to  the  deposing  power,  I  may  recall  to  your  recollection  the  fact 
that  five  great  universities  of  Europe  were  consulted  by  Williaip  Pitt, 
and  they  all,  in  the  most  solemn  language,  reprobated  such  a  doctrine 
Their  decisions  may  appear  in  an  appendix,  if  we  publish  one.  I 
have  not  time  to  read  them  now.  In  Millner's  End  of  controversy, 
and  Charles  Butler's  memoirs  of  Engliuh,  Irish  and  Scottish  Catholics, 
we'll  find  these  matters  fairly  stated  and  discussed. 

There  is  more  liberty  in  Rome  than  the  gentleman  gives  it  credit 
for.  There  is  a  Protestant  church,  even  in  Rome,  where  service  is 
regularly  performed  according  to  the  Episcopalian  rite.  The  Jews 
are  not  any  where  more  charitably  treated,  than  in  the  eternal  city. 
Last  year,  they  presented  a  splendid  copy  of  the  Holy  Bible,  or  some 
wther  sacred  book,  to  the  pope,  as  a  token  of  their  gratitude. 

The  gentleman  calls  the  system  of  tithes  a  dying  system.    It  ha« 


'(  ROMAN    CATHOLIC    RELIGION.  355 

indeed  been  a  dying  system.     It  has  slain  its  thousands,  and  made 
the  condition  of  the  living  worse  than  that  of  the  dead. 

Judge  Hall,  of  this  place,  has  treated  the  question  discussed,  more 
learnedly  and  eloquently  than  my  worthy  opponent  or  myself.  I  will 
give  his  remarks  the  place  to  which  they  are  so  well  entitled  for 
candor  and  liberality. 

'•■J  Ills  question  has  become  so  important  in  the  United  States,  that  it  is  time  to 
b?gin  to  inquire  into  its  bearings,  and  to  Itnow  whether  the  public  are  really  in- 
tere*»eil  in  the  excitement  which  has  been  gotten  up  with  unusual  industry,  and 
has  been  kept  alive  with  a  pertinacity  that  has  seldom  been  equaled.  For  seve- 
ral years  past  the  religious  protestant  papers  of  our  country,  with  but  few  ex 
ceptions,  have  teemed  with  virulent  attacks  against  the  Catholics,  and  especiallj 
with  paragraphs  charging  them  substantially  with  designs  hostile  to  our  free  in- 
stitutions, and  with  a  systematic  opposition  to  the  spread  of  all  free  inquiry  and 
liberal  knowledo^e.  These  are  grave  charges,  involving  consequences  of  serious 
import,  and  such  as  should  not  be  believed  or  disbelieved  upon  mere  rumor,  or 
permitted  to  rest  upon  any  vague  hypothesis;  because  they  are  of  a  nature  which 
renders  them  susceptible  of  proofs  The  spirit  of  our  institutions  requires  that 
these  questions  should  be  thus  examined.  We  profess  to  guaranty  to  every  in- 
habitant of  our  country,  certain  rights,  in  the  enjoyment  of  which  he  shall  not 
be  molested,  except  through  the  instrumentality  of  a  process  of  law  which  is 
clearly  indicated.  Life,  liberty,  property,  reputation,  are  thus  guarded — and 
equally  sacred  is  the  right  secured  to  every  man,  to  '  worship  God  according 
to  the  dictates  of  his  own  conscience.' 

But  it  is  idle  to  talk  of  these  inestimable  rights,  as  having  any  efficacious  ex 
istence,  if  the  various  checks  and  sanctions,  thrown  around  them  by  our  consti- 
tution and  law^s,  may  be  evaded,  and  a  lawless  majority,  with  a  high  hand,  ravish 
them  b}'  force  from  a  few  individuals  who  may  be  effectually  outlawed  by  a  per- 
verted public  opinion,  produced  by  calumny  and  clamor.  It  is  worse  than  idle, 
it  is  wicked,  to  talk  of  liberty,  while  a  majority,  having  no  other  right  than  that 
of  the  strongest,  persist  in  blasting  the  character  of  unotfending  individuals  bj 
calumny,  and  in  oppressing  them  by  direct  violence  upon  their  persons  and 
property,  not  only  without  evidence  of  their  delinquency,  but  against  evidence; 
not  only  without  law,  but  in  violation  of  law — and  merely  because  they  belong^ 
to  an  unpopular  denomination. 

The  very  fact  that  the  Roman  Catholics  are,  and  can  be  with  impunity,  thus 
trampled  upon,  in  a  country  like  ours,  affords  in  itself  the  most  conclusive 
evidence  of  the  groundlessness  of  the  fears,  which  are  entertained  by  some 
respecting  them.  Without  the  power  to  protect  themselves,  iu  the  enjoyment 
of  the  ordinary  rights  of  citizenship,  and  with  a  current  of  prejudice  setting  so 
strongly  against  them,  that  they  find  safety  only  in  bending  meekly  to  the  storm, 
bow  idle,  how  puerile,  how  disingenuous  is  it,  to  rave  as  some  have  done,  of  the 
danger  of  Catholic  influence! 

We  repeat  that  this  is  a  question  which  must  rest  upon  testimony.  The 
American  people  are  too  intelligent,  toojust,  too  magnanimous,  to  suffer  the  tem- 
porary delusion  by  which  so  many  have  been  blinded,  to  settle  down  into  a  per- 
manent national  prejudice,  and  to  oppress  one  christian  denomination  at  the 
bidding  of  others  without  some  proof,  or  some  reasonable  argument. 

We  nave  not  vet  seen  any  evidence  in  the  various  publications  that  have 
reached  us.  of  any  unfairness  on  the  part  of  the  Catholics,  in  the  propagation 
of  their  religious  doctrines.  If  they  are  active,  persevering,  and  ingenious  in 
tnet  attempts  to  gain  converts,  and  if  they  are  successful  in  securing  the  coun- 
tenance and  support  of  those  who  maintain  the  same  form  of  belief  in  other 
countries,  these  we  imagine,  are  the  legitimate  proofs  of  christian  zeal  and  sin- 
cerity. In  relation  to  protestant  sects,  they  are  certainly  go  estimated;  and  we 
are  vet  to  learn,  why  the  ordinary  laws  of  evidence  are  to  be  set  aside  in  refer- 
ence to  this  denomination,  and  why  the  missionary  spirit  which  is  so  praisewor- 
thy in  others,  should  be  thought  so  wicked  and  so  dangerous  in  them. 

'Let  us  inquire  into  th's  matter  calmly.  Why  is  it  that  the  Catholics  are  pur- 
sued with  such  pertinacity,  with  such  vindictiveness,  with  such  ruthless  malevo- 
lence? Why  cannot  their  peculiar  opinions  be  opposed  by  argument,  by  per- 
suasion, by  remonstrance,  as  one  christian  sect  should  oppose  each  other?  We 
tpeal:  ki«dly  of  the  Jew,  and  even  of  the  heathen;  there  are  those  that  love  a 


356  DEBATE    ON    THE 

Negro  or  a  Cherokee  even  better  than  their  own  flesh  and  blood  ;  but  a  Catholic 
is  an  abomination,  for  whom  tbere  is  no  law,  no  charity,  no  bond  of  christian 
fraternity. 

These  reflections  rise  naturally  out  of  the  recent  proceedings  rn  relation  to 
the  Roman  Catholics.  A  nunnery  has  been  demolished  by  an  infuriated  mob — 
a  small  community  of  refined  and  unprotected  females,  lawfully  and  usefully  en- 
gaged in  the  tuition  of  children,  whose  parents  have  voluntarily  committed  them 
to  their  care,  have  been  driven  from  their  home — ^yet  the  perpetrators  have  es- 
caped punishment,  and  the  act,  if  not  openly  excused,  is  winked  at,  by  protectant 
christians.  The  outrage  was  public,  extensive,  and  undeniable;  and  a  most  re 
spectable  committee,  who  investigated  all  the  facts,  have  shown  that  it  was  un 
provoked — a  mere  wanton  ebullition  of  savage  malignity.  Yet  the  sympathief 
of  a  large  portion  of  the  protestant  community  are  untouched. 

(s  another  instance  required,  of  the  pervading  character  of  this  prejudice? 
How  conunon  has  been  the  expedient,  employed  by  missionaries  from  the  west, 
in  the  eastern  states,  of  raising  money  for  education  or  for  religion  upon  the  al- 
legation that  it  was  necessary  to  prevent  the  ascendency  of  the  catholics.  How 
o'ten  has  it  been  asserted,  throughout  the  last  ten  years,  that  this  fvas  the  chosen 
field  on  which  the  papists  had  erected  their  standard,  and  where  the  battle  must 
be  fought  for  civil  and  religious  liberty.  What  tales  of  horror  have  been  poured 
into  the  eai-s  of  the  confiding  children  of  the  pilgrims — of  young  men  emigrat- 
ing to  the  west,  marrying  catholic  ladies,  and  collapsing  without  a  struggle  into 
the  arms  of  Hom^isni — of  splendid  edifices  undermined  by  profound  dungeons, 
prepared  for  the  reception  of  heretic  republicans — of  boxes  of  firearms  secretly 
transported  into  hidden  receptacles,  in  the  very  bosoms  of  our  flourishing  cities 
of  vast  and  widely  ramified  European  conspiracies  bj  which  Irish  catholics  ar« 
suddenly  converted  into  lovers  of  monarchy,  and  obedient  instruments  of  kings'. 

A  prejudice  so  indomitable  and  so  blind,  could  not  fail,  in  an  ingenious  and  eu 
terprisiiig  land  (ike  ours,  to  be  made  the  subject  of  pecuniary  speculation;  accord- 
ingly we  find  such  works  as  the  'Master  Key  to  Popery,'  'Secrets  of  Female 
Convents,'  and  '  Six  Months  in  a  Convent,'  manufactured  with  a  distinct  vie»v 
to  making  a  profit  out  of  this  diseased  »tate  of  the  public  mind.  The  abuse  of 
the  catholics  therefore  is  not  merely  matter  of  party  rancor,  but,  is  a  regular 
trade,  and  the  compilation  of  anti-catholic  books  of  the  character  alluded  to,  has 
become  a  part  of  the  regular  industry  of  the  country,  as  much  as  the  making  of 
nutmegs,  or  the  construction  of  clocks. 

Philosophy  sanctions  the  belief,  that  power  held  by  any  set  of  men  without 
restraint  or  competition,  is  liable  to  abuse;  and  history  teaches  the  humiliating 
&ct  that  power  thus  held  has  always  been  abused.  To  inquire  who  has  been 
the  greatest  aggressor  against  the  rights  of  human  nature,  when  all  who  have 
been  tempted  have  evinced  a  common  propensity  to  trample  upon  the  laws  of 
justice  and  benevolence,  would  be  an  unprofitable  procedure.  The  reformer? 
punished  heresy  by  death  as  well  as  the  catholics;  and  the  murders  perpetrated 
by  intolerance,  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  were  not  less  atrocious  than  those 
whicti  occurred  under  '  the  bloody  Mary.'  We  might  even  come  nearer  home, 
and  point  to  colonies  on  our  own  continent,  planted  by  men  professing  to  have 
fled  from  religious  persecution,  who  not  only  excluded  from  all  civil  and  politi- 
cal rights  those  who  were  separated  from  them  by  only  slight  shades  of  religi- 
ous belief,  but  persecuted  many  even  to  death,  for  heresy  and  witchcraft.  Yet 
these  things  are  not  taken  into  the  calculation,  and  the  catholics  are  assumed, 
without  examination,  to  be  exclusively  and  especially  prone  to  the  sins  of  op- 
pression and  cruelty. 

The  French  catholics,  at  a  very  early  period,  commenced  a  system  of  missinnt 
for  the  conversion  of  the  Indians,  and  were  remarkably  successful  in  gaining 
converts,  and  conciliating  the  confidence  and  aflfections  of  the  tribes.  While  th« 
Pequods  and  other  northern  tribes  were  becoming  exterminated,  or  sold  intc 
slavery,  the  more  fortunate  savage  of  the  Mississippi  was  listening  to  the  pious 
counsels  of  the  catholic  missionary. — This  is  another  fact,  which  deserves  to  b*' 
remembered,  and  which  should  be  weighed  in  the  examination  of  the  testimony 
It  shews  that  the  catholic  appetite  for  cruelty  if  not  quite  so  keen  as  is  usually 
imagined,  and  that  they  exercised,  of  choice,  an  expansive  benevolence,  at  a  peri- 
od when  protestants,  similarly  situated,  were  blood-thirsty  and  rapacious. 

Advancing  a  little  further  in  point  of  time,  we  find  a  number  of  colonies  ad- 
<rancing  rapidly  tovveirdg  prosperity,  on  our  Atlantic  sea  board,     'a  point  uf  civil 


HOMAN    CATHOLIC    REUpiOR.  357 

government  they  were  somewhat  detached,  each  making  it«  own  municipal 
laws,  and  there  being  in  each  a  predominance  of  the  influence  of  one  religious 
lenoniination.  We  might  theretore  expect  to  see  the  political  bias  of  each  sect 
-arried  out  into  praciice,  and  it  is  curious  to  examine  how  far  such  was  the  fact. 
[t  IS  the  more  curious,  because  the  writers  and  orators  of  c.ne  branch  of  this 
Camily  of  republics,  are  m  the  habit  of  attributing  to  theirown  fathers,  the  prin- 
ciples of  religious  and  politicra!  toleration,  which  became  established  througnout 
the  whole,  and  are  now  the  boast  and  pride  of  our  nation.  The  impartial  record 
of  Kistorv  ali'ords  on  this  subject  a  proof  alike  honorable  to  all,  but  which  re- 
bukes alike  the  sectional  or  sectarian  vanity  of  each.  New-England  was  settled 
by  English  puritans,  New-York  by  Dutch  proteslants,  Pennsylvania  by  Quakers, 
Maryland  by  Catholics,  Virginia  by  the  Episcopalian  adherents  of  the  Stuarts 
and  South  Carolina  by  a  mingled  population  of  roundheads  and  cavaliers  fror 
England  and  of  French  huguenots — yet  the  same  broad  foundations  of  civil  and 
political  liberty  were  laid  sinmltaneously  in  them  all,  and  the  same  spirit  of  re- 
sistance animated  each  community,  when  the  oppressions  of  the  mother  country 
became  intolerable.  Religious  intolei-ance  prevailed  in  early  times  only  in  the 
eastern  colonies-.but  the  witchcraft  superstition,  though  most  strongly  developed 
there,  pervaded  some  other  portions  of  the  new  settlements.  We  shall  not  ampli- 
fy our  remarks  on  this  topic;  it  is  enough  to  say,  that  if  the  love  of  monarchy 
was  a  component  principle  of  the  catholic  faith,  it  was  not  developed  in  oui 
country  when  a  iair  opportunity  was  oHered  for  its  exercise;  and  that  in  the  glo 
rious  struggle  for  liberty,  for  civil  and  religious  emancipation — when  our  fathers 
arrayed  themselves  in  defence  of  the  sacred  principles  involving  the  whole  broad 
ground  of  contest  between  liberty  and  despotism,  tne  catholic  and  the  protestant 
stood  side  by  side  on  the  battle  field,  and  in  the  council,  and  pledged  to  their 
common  country,  with  equal  devotedness,  their  lives,  their  fortunes,  and  theirsa- 
cred  honor.  Nor  should  it  be  forgotten,  that  in  a  contlict  thus  peculiarly  mark- 
ed, a  catholic  king  was  our  ally,  when  the  most  powerful  of  protestant  govern- 
ments was  ourfnemy." 

Now,  my  friends  and  fellow  citizens,  let  me  have  permission  to 
close  this  debate  by  the  language  of  the  illustrious  Washington, 
in  his  answer  to  the  patriotic  address  of  the  U.  S.  Catholics.  I  dis- 
claim all  unkind  feelings  towards  Mr.  Campbell  or  any  of  his  friends, 
and  acknowledge  my  gratitude  to  him  for  enabling  me  to  place  my 
religion,  in  its  proper  light,  before  the  public.  I  also  beg  leave  res- 
pectfully to  tender  to  this  audience  my  thanks  for  the  dignity  of  their 
deportment  during  this  debate.  Instead  of  quarreling  about  religion 
we  ought  to  be  engaged  in  our  vocation  of  love  and  peace,  as  its 
faitliful  ministers,  and  sincere  professors.  We  have  all,  a  great  deal 
to  do  to  improve  the  morals  of  the  age,  to  elevate  the  standard  of 
literature,  to  promote  by  such  means  as  all  christians  approve,  the 
welfare  of  our  common  country,  and  to  obtain  for  our  green  state,  the  fer- 
tile and  flourishing,  Ohio,  a  distinguished  rank  for  knowledge,  virtue 
and  patriotism,  among  her  elder  and  her  younger  sisters  in  this  fair 
republic.  These  are  legitimate  pursuits,  alike  pleasing  to  God,  aiid 
useful  to  man.  The  world  is  large  enough  for  us  all.  Some  can,  in 
the  Abraham  and  Lot  way  of  settling  their  difficulties,  feed  their 
flocks  in  one  field,  and  some  in  another ;  and,  as  Joseph  said  to  his 
brethren  going  home  to  their  father,  from  Egypt,  as  we  are  going  to 
ene  heavenly  Father,  "  see  that  ye  fall  not  out  by  the  way  "  (Reads 
flora  Washington's  letter  as  follows:) 

To  iHE  Roman  Catholics  in  the  Umted  States  of  America. 

Gentlemen — While  I  now  receive  with  much  satisfaction  your  congratulatic^is 
on  my  being  called  by  an  unanimous  vote,  to  the  first  station  in  my  ccu-itry,  I 
cannot  but  dul  v  notice  vour  politeness,  in  offering  an  apology  for  the  unavoidable 
il.  lay.  As  thait  delay  has  given  you  an  opportunity  of  realizing,  instead  of  antici- 
pating, the  benefits  of  the  general  government,  you  will  do  me  the  justice  to  be- 
lieve, that  your  testimony  of  the  increase  of  tlie  public  prosperity,  enhances  the 


858  DEBATE    ON    THE 

pleasure,  which  T  should  otherwise  have  experienced  from  your  affectionate  ad 
dress. 

I  feel  that  nn'  conduct,  in  war  and  in  peace,  has  met  with  more  general  apfTO 
bation  than  could  have  reasonably  been  expected;  and  I  find  myself  disposed  to 
consider  that  fortunate  circumstance,  in  a  great  degree,  resulting  from  the  able 
support,  and  extraordinary  candor,  of  my  fellow-citiiens  of  all  deocminatious. 

The  pix)spect  of  national  prosperity  now  before  us,  is  truly  animating,  and 
ought  to  excite  the  exertions  of  all  good  men,  to  establish  and  secure  the  happi- 
ness of  their  country,  in  the  permanent  duration  of  its  freedom  and  indepen- 
dence. America,  under  the  smiles  of  divine  providence,  the  protection  of 
a  good  government,  and  the  cultivation  of  manners,  morals,  and  piety,  cannot 
foil  of  attaining  an  uncommon  degree  of  eminence  in  literature,  commerce,  agri- 
culture, improvements  at  home,  and  respectability  abroad. 

As  mauN  nd  become  more  liberal,  they  will  be  more  apt  to  allow,  that  all  those 
who  conduct  themselves  as  worthy  members  of  the  community,  are  cuually  entitled 
to  the  protection  of  civil  government.  I  hope  ever  to  see  America  among  the 
foremost  nations  in  examples  of  justice  and  liberality.  And  I  presume  that  your 
fellow  citizens  will  notjbrget  the  patriotic  part  which  you  took  in  the  accom- 
flishment  of  their  revolution,  and  the  estaldishment  of  their  government,  or  the 
important  assistance  which  they  received  from  a  nation  in  which  the  Roman 
Catholic  faith  is  professed. 

I  thank  you,  gentlemen,  for  you?  kind  concern  for  me.  While  my  life  and 
ray  health  shall  continue,  in  whatever  situation  I  may  be,  it  shall  be  my  con- 
stant endeavor  to  justify  the  favorable  sentiments  which  you  are  pleased  to 
express  of  ray  conduct.  And  may  tlie  members  of  your  society  in  America,  ani- 
mated alone  by  the  pure  spirit  of  Christianity, and  still  conducting  themselves  as 
the  faithful  subjects  of  our  government,  enjoy  every  temporal  and  spiritual  felicity 

GEORGE  WASHINGTON. 
March,  1790. 

\  [end  of  the  debate.] 


The  following  are  the  extracts  referred  to  on  page  224  :— 

Ekglish  Divines. 
"  Confession  to  a  priest,  the  minister  of  pardon  and  reconciliation,  the  curatt 
of  souls,  and  the  guide  of  consciences,  is  of  so  great  use  and  beneft,  to  all  that 
are  heavy  laden  ivtth  their  sins,  that  they  who  carelessly  and  causelessly  neglect 
it,  are  neither  lovers  of  the  peace  of  consciences,  nor  careful  for  the  advantage 
of  their  souls."  {Bp.  Jer.  Taylor,  of  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  repentance, 
chap.  X.  sec.  4.)  "  For  the  publication  of  our  sins  to  the  minister  of  holy  things, 

'  TOUTii*  ix"  rhv  xoyov,  Sv  {■/,'■•  <l  e»"J('Ji,-  rHv  <rj,/tXT,x^v  jrxSii/,  said  Basil,  {RegtlL 
Brev.  229,)  is  just  like  the  manifestation  of  the  diseases  of  our  body  to  the  phys- 
ician for  God  hath  appointed  them,  as  spiritual  physicians."  {Taylor,  uf  supra.) 
P.  S.  It  has  startled  many  an  honest  independent ,  who  by  chance  has  got  hola 
of  an  original  work  of  sturdy  John  Calvin,  or  Martin  I.uther,whenin  some  well- 
prized  "  commentarie;"  some  latent  passage  of  "  7'Ae  Institutions,"  he  has  en- 
countered sly  admissions,  well  guarded  by  cautious  '  ifs,'  and  left  to  their  oitm 
fatt;  without  d  fence  or  apology,  yet  savoring  much  rf  ancient  heresy.  Ana 
in  the  honesty  of  his  ignorance,  he  has  exclaimed,  as  he  returned  the  dusty 
volume  to  its  shelf — Great  Calvin!  much  learning  hath  made  thee  mad.  The  bi- 
ble, and  the  bible  alone,  is  the  religion  of  Rrotestants.  Where  have  been  Protes- 
tants as  consistent  as  the  Covenanters  and  the  Puritans?  Assigning  to  Rome 
the  whole  body  of  christian  testimony,  experience,  and  wisdom ;  outspreading, 
in  one  hanl,  the  broad  banner  of  private  opinion;  coolly  hariging  and  burning 
their  brother-democrats  with  the  other;  extolling  Protestantism  as  the  religion 

of  the  enlightened ;  fairly  proving  it  the  religion  cf  the  ignorant And  who  are 

they  that  the  bigoted  "  no  bigot"  points  at,  "  Romanists,"  "  Papishers,"  "  neat 
neighbors  to  tht  Babylon  of  abominations'."  They  are  men  wito  have  devoted 
their  lives  to  th    study  of  the  legitimate  authorities  9^ doctrine  and  Wie." 


ROMAH    CATHOLIC    RELIGIOJT. 


3ftO 


This  was  exhibited  and  the  names  read  at  the  close  of  debate  on 
apostolic  succession. 

•Tabular  view  of  the  order  of  the  Episcopal  succession  in  the  pronfioent  vdou 
tile)  Dioceses  mentioned  by  Eusebius. 

Bishops  of  Rome. 

Peter  and  Paul,  according  to  Eusebius,  died  as  martyrs  at  Rome;  after  Vhese 
followed. 


1  Linns 

2  Aneticletus, 

3  Clement, 

4  Euarestus, 

5  Alexander, 


9  Pius, 

10  Anicetus, 

11  Soter, 

12  Eleutherus, 

13  Victor, 


6  Xy8tusorSixtus,14  Zephyrinus, 

7  Telesphorus,       15  Callisthus, 


8  H^'ginus, 

1  Evodius, 

2  Ignatius, 

3  Heion, 

4  Cornelius, 

5  Eros, 


16  (Jrbanus, 

17  Pontiaiiu*. 

18  Anteros. 

19  Fabianiis, 

20  Cornelius, 

21  Lucius, 

22  Slrphaiius, 


23  Xyslus  orSixVut  ii 

24  Oionyslus, 

25  Felix, 

26  Eutychianus, 

27  Caius, 

20  Marceilinus. 
29  Miltiades. 


Bishops  of  Antioch 
6  Theophilus,         11   Zebinas, 


7  Maximinus, 

8  Serapion, 

9  Asclepiades, 
10  Philetus, 


12  Baby  las, 

13  Fabius, 

14  Denietrianus, 

15  Paul  of  Samosata 


16  Domnns, 

17  Tiniopus, 

18  Cyrillus, 

19  Tyrannus, 


Bishops  of  Alexandria. 
The  evangelist  Mark,  established  the  church  there,  and  after  him  came, 


1  Annianus, 

2  Aviliiis, 

3  Cerdo, 

4  Primus, 

5  Justus, 

Tbelyraedres, 
Heliodorus, 

Theophilus 
Theoctistus, 


6  Eunienes, 

7  Marcus, 
ft  Celadion, 

9  Agrippinus, 
10  Julianus, 


11  Demetrius, 

12  Heraclas, 

13  Dionysius, 

14  Maxinius, 

15  Theonas, 


Bishops  of  Laodicea. 
Socrates,  Anatolius, 

Eusebiuaof  Alexandria,  Stephen, 

Bishops  of  Cesarea. 
Domnus,  Ag^pius, 

Theotecnus, 


16  Peler, 

17  Achillas, 

18  Alexander, 


Theodotas, 


Eusebius. 


Having  revised  some  three  hundred  pages  of  proof  of  this  debate,  before  I 
left  Cincinnati  for  New  Orleans,  on  the  2nd  of  March,  1837,  I  am  willing  to 
consider  and  approve  the  report,  as  being  substantially  correct.  I  have  the  ut- 
wtwl  confidence  in  the  honor  and  honesty  of  the  publishers,  Messrs.  J.  A.  James 
fc  Co.,  that  the  balance  of  the  discussion  will  be  fairly  presented  to  the  public. 

+  JOHN  B.  PURCELL.  Bishop  of  Cincinnati. 


THE  DISPUTED  PASSAGE  OF  ST.  LIGORI.— MR.  CAMPBELL'S 
DOCUMENTARY  SUBSTANTIATION. 

The  render,  who  looks  bark  to  pages  219,253,  will  there  see  with  what  solemn 
a.id  strong  asseverations  the  Bishop  declared  that  no  such  passage  as  that  quoted 
from  page  294  was  ever  written  by  Saint  Ligori.* 

Mr.  bMiTH,  in  reply  to  ray  letter  per  Mr.  Emmons,  wrote  as  follows — 

"The  obnoxious  passage,  then,  which  the  Romish  Bishop  of  Cincinnati  calls  hea- 
veii  and  fearth  to  witness  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  works  of  Ligori,  is  the  following: 

"  A  Bishop,  however  poor  he  may  be,  cannot  appropriate  to  himself  pecuniary 
fines,  wrthcnt  the  licence  of  the  Apostolical  See.  But  he  ought  to  apply  them 
to  pious  USPS.  Much  less  can  he  apply  those  fines  to  any  thing  else  but  pioui 
uses,  which  the  Council  qf  Trent  has  laid  upon  non-resident  Clergymen,  or 
upon  those  Clergymen  who  keep  Concubines." — Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444. 

This  passage,  I  will  now  give  in  the  Latin,  as  it  stands  on  the  444th  page  of 
the  8th  volume  of  the  "MoRAL  THEOLOGY  of  Alphonsus  DE  LiGORIO,"  from 
whose  Work  the  extract  was  made.     The  words  are  as  follows: 

"Mulctas  pecuniarias  Episcopus  sibi  addicere  non  potest,  qnantumvis  pauper 

*  See  pages  260,  319,  3i0. 


360  DEBATE    &C. 

Ht,  sine  licentia  Sedis  Apostolicae.  [ut  ex  pluribus  at^mentis  S.  Congregui. 
cvincitnr  in  Tract.  De  Syn.  Dioec.  L.  10.  C.  10.  N.  2.]  Sed  debeut  in  usus  pioi 
eip«iidi.  iVjulto  iiiagis  non  possunt  nisi  in  pios  usus  applicari  ill*  tnulcloe,  qaas 
Tndentiaum  iaflixit  Clericis  non  residentibus,  aut  concubinariis." — Ligor.  Epit. 
Doc.  Mor.  p.  444. 

The  words  included  in  the  brackets,  were  not  translated,  merely  because  } 
did  not  wish  to  encumber  the  **  Sjriy'OPSls,"  (as  I  have  observed  in  the  "  Pre- 
face OF  THE  SrNOPSis,")  with  too  many  of  the  authorities  quoted  by  Ligori. 
I  shall  now,  however,  translate  the  above  words  in  the  brackets,  much,  I  know, 
to  the  disconifitiire  of  his  Reverence  the  Romish  Bishop  of  Cincinnati.  The 
wolds  in  the  brackets,  therefore,  translated,  are  as  follows  ■  ["  as  is  evident  from 
many  arguments  of  the  Holy  Congregation,  in  the  Treatise  respecting  the  Dio- 
cesan Synods,  Book  10,  Chapter  10,  iVumber  2."] 

Here  we  have,  not  onlv  the  authority  of  St.  Ligori,  but  also  that  of  the 
"  Holy  Congregation  of  liites.''^ 

Since  this  subject  is  now  to  be  probed  to  the  bottom,  we  will  also  translate 
the  conti-acted  words  which  I  transferred  into  the  "  Syn<^sis,"  as  I  found  them 
in  the  original.  The  words  to  which  I  allude  are  the  terminating  ones  of  the 
disputed  passage,  as  follows: — "  Ligor.  Ep.  Doc.  Mor.  p.  444." — which,  trans- 
lated, stand  thus: — "  From  the  Work  of  Ligori,  under  the  head  of*  An  Epitome 
of  the  Moral  Doctrine,'  page  444." 

In  order  to  render  the  testimony  still  more  striking,  it  is  important  to  observ* 
that  this  "  Epitome  of  the  Moral  Doctrine,"  to  which  Ligori  alludes,  is  an  Epi 
tome  compiled  by  no  less  a  personage  than  Pope  Benedict  XIV.  as  we  are  in- 
formed by  Ligori  himself,  in  the  301st  page  of  the  8th  volume  of  his  "MoRAl 
Theology." 

That  the  previous  Latin  words  are  truly  and  faithfully  the  words  of  St.  Ligori 
and  fairly  extracted  from  8th  volume,  p.  444.  is  duly  certified  by  the  following 
learned  gentlemen. 

We,  the  undersigned,  have  carefully  examined  the  foregoing  extracts  from 
the  Moral  Theolog}-  of  St.  Ligori;  and  having  compared  tbeni  with  the  original 
Latin  copy  of  that  Work,  now  before  us,  we  do  nereby  cert'fy  that  the  said 
extracts  are  verbatim,  truly  and  correctly  given  by  Mr.  Smith. 

In  this  certificate,  we  include,  particularly,  the  pa.ssage  disputed  by  Bishop 
Purcell,  which  is  contained  in  Mr.  Smith's  "  SVNOPSIS,"  p.  294,  par.  7,  headed 
"  Concubines  of  the  CiiERGV." 

DUNCAN  DUNB.\R,  Pastor  of  the  M'Dovgalst.  Bapt.  Church. 

JNO.  KENNADAY.  Pastor  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 

SPENCER  H.  CONE,  Pastor  of  the  Oliverstrf.et  Baptist  Church. 

SAM'L  P.  B.  MORSE,   Prof,  i^-c.in  theUniversitv  of  the  City  of  JVeu  Torlu 

WM.  GREEN,  Jr.  Deacon  in  the  6th  Free  Cortg.  Church,  JV.  Y. 

C.  G.  FINNEY,  Pastor  of  the  Churchin  the  Breadtcay  Tabernacle. 
New- York,  Feb'y  23,  1837. 

On  receiving  the  abore  communication  from  Mr.  Smith  I  asked  from  bishop 
Purcell  the  loan  of  the  works  of  St.  Ligori.  He  politely  complied  with  my  re- 
quest. Turning  to  the  page,  444,  volume  8,  I  found  every  word  in  his  own 
edition  as  above  reported.  I  carried  it  and  the  Synopsis  of  Mr.  Smith  to  our 
mutual  friend  Mr.  Kinmont,  to  whom  it  was  now  my  time  to  appeal.  Mr.  Kin- 
cnont  read  both  the  original  and  the  translation:  and  then  certified  as  follows. 

The  above  (version  of  Smith  p.  294)  I  regard  to  be  a  faiihfnl  translation  of 
the  passage  as  it  stands  in  the  8tn  volume  of  Ligori  page  444. 

Cincinnati,  Feb'y  3,  1837.  ALEXANDER  KlNMONT. 

Having  read  all  the  proofs  of  this  discussion,  I  certify,  that  the  reader  has 
substantially,  as  correctly,  as  under  all  the  circumstances  could  have  been  ex 
pected,  a  fair  representation  of  the  whole  discussion. 

March  7,  1837.  A.  CAMPBELL. 


THE  BND 


UCSB  LIBRARY 


